Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Hines v. State

Hines v. State

838 So. 2d 658, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 2396, 2003 WL 554424
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hines v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 906 So. 2d 1137 →
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 28, 2003·No. No. 2D02-4235·Published

Opinion

COVINGTON, Judge.

Edrick Lee Hines appeals from the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence. Hines claims that his sentence is illegal under this court’s decision in Taylor v. State, 818 So.2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), which held chapter'99-188, Laws of Florida, unconstitutional. Hines’ claim is facially insufficient as he does not claim that his date of offense is within the window created by Taylor, nor does he inform the court of what he was convicted, all things required to create a facially sufficient Taylor claim. We therefore affirm without prejudice to Hines’ filing a facially sufficient 3.800(a) motion.

FULMER and KELLY, JJ., Concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hines v. State, 838 So. 2d 658, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 2396, 2003 WL 554424 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

838 So. 2d 658 (Hines v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Taylor v. State
818 So. 2d 544 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)