Jones v. State

779 So. 2d 329, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 16225, 1999 WL 1111747
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Jones v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 13429
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 8, 1999·No. No. 99-00351·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Mr. Jones appeals the sentence imposed on his violation of probation. He claims that an unpreserved Karchesky1 error exists on his sentencing scoresheet. Such an error cannot be reviewed on direct appeal. See State v. Montague, 682 So.2d 1085 (Fla.1996). It is not apparent on the face of the record that a Karchesky error actually exists in this case. We cannot determine whether Mr. Jones’ counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the scoresheet. Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to Mr. Jones’ right to file a timely motion for postconviction relief pur[330]*330suant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.

Affirmed.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and WHATLEY and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.

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

Jones v. State, 779 So. 2d 329, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 16225, 1999 WL 1111747 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

779 So. 2d 329 (Jones v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Karchesky v. State
591 So. 2d 930 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1992)
State v. Montague
682 So. 2d 1085 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)