Kale v. State

767 So. 2d 1269, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 12328, 2000 WL 1396018
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 27, 2000·No. No. 3D00-1207·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Although the trial judge denied the defendant’s 3.850 motion on the erroneous ground that it was untimely filed, we affirm on the authority of section 39.059(7)(d), Florida Statutes (1995). See Cargle v. State, No. SC92031, slip op. at 7 & n. 2, — So.2d-,-& n. 2, 2000 WL 1353726 (Fla. Sept.21, 2000) (majority opinion); id. at 8-10, at-(Pariente, J., concurring).

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

Kale v. State, 767 So. 2d 1269, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 12328, 2000 WL 1396018 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

767 So. 2d 1269 (Kale v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cargle v. State
770 So. 2d 1151 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)