Kindell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kindell v. State

825 So. 2d 492, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12528, 2002 WL 2006125

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 30, 2002

DocketNo. 2D02-3048

StatusPublished

This text of 825 So. 2d 492 (Kindell 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

Kindell v. State, 825 So. 2d 492, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12528, 2002 WL 2006125 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Charles Wesley Kindell, Jr., appeals the denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal [493]*493Procedure 3.800(a) and his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the trial court’s order denying Mr. Kindell’s motions without prejudice to any right Mr. Kindell may have to file a timely, facially sufficient 3.850 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for his counsel’s failure to object to an offense on Mr. Kindell’s scoresheet that Mr. Kindell claims he did not commit. Such a motion, if filed, shall not be deemed successive.

Affirm.

ALTENBERND, CASANUEVA, and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Charles Wesley Kindell, Jr., appeals the denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal [493]*493Procedure 3.800(a) and his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the trial court’s order denying Mr. Kindell’s motions without prejudice to any right Mr. Kindell may have to file a timely, facially sufficient 3.850 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for his counsel’s failure to object to an offense on Mr. Kindell’s scoresheet that Mr. Kindell claims he did not commit. Such a motion, if filed, shall not be deemed successive.

Affirm.

ALTENBERND, CASANUEVA, and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

825 So. 2d 492, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12528, 2002 WL 2006125, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kindell-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.