Kerr v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kerr v. State

893 So. 2d 705, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 1872, 2005 WL 405502

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Kerr v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 954 So. 2d 692 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 22, 2005·No. No. 1D04-4141·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion alleging an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the appellant has stated a facially sufficient claim that he is entitled to resentencing pursuant to Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla.2000), on Count II for robbery with a firearm, we reverse and remand for the trial court to reconsider this claim. His claim regarding Count I is without merit. See § 921.001(4)(b)2., Fla. Stat. (1995).

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.

WOLF, C.J., DAVIS and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion alleging an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the appellant has stated a facially sufficient claim that he is entitled to resentencing pursuant to Heggs v. State, 759 So.2d 620 (Fla.2000), on Count II for robbery with a firearm, we reverse and remand for the trial court to reconsider this claim. His claim regarding Count I is without merit. See § 921.001(4)(b)2., Fla. Stat. (1995).

AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED AND REMANDED IN PART.

WOLF, C.J., DAVIS and BROWNING, JJ., concur.

Kerr v. State, 893 So. 2d 705, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 1872, 2005 WL 405502 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

893 So. 2d 705 (Kerr v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related