Jefferson v. State

895 So. 2d 1263, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3070, 2005 WL 545199
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 9, 2005·No. No. 3D04-2509·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that a claim that a notice of intent to habitualize is not sufficiently specific must be raised in a Rule 3.850 motion).

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

Jefferson v. State, 895 So. 2d 1263, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3070, 2005 WL 545199 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

895 So. 2d 1263 (Jefferson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

IMC Phosphates Co. v. Prater
895 So. 2d 1263 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)