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

Keifner v. State

896 So. 2d 955, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3542, 2005 WL 602638
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 16, 2005
DocketNo. 4D04-4798
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 896 So. 2d 955 (Keifner v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Keifner v. State, 896 So. 2d 955, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3542, 2005 WL 602638 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion alleging that he was improperly sentenced in absentia while incarcerated on unrelated charges, without prejudice to his filing a timely rule 8.850 motion in proper form, in light of Zuluaga v. State, 793 So.2d 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (claims of improper sentencing in absentia are properly raised in a rule 3.850 motion). We do not have a sufficient record to determine whether, if appellant does file a rule 3.850 motion, it would be successive under rule 3.850(f), and this opinion should not be construed as deciding that issue.

POLEN, SHAHOOD and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Herndon v. State
939 So. 2d 172 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
896 So. 2d 955, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 3542, 2005 WL 602638, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/keifner-v-state-fladistctapp-2005.