Lee v. State

390 So. 2d 1195, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 23305
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Lee v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 368 So. 2d 395
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 22, 1980·No. No. WW-69·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief for the reason that the motion is legally insufficient on its face. Appellant’s allegations concerning errors in a pre-sentence investigation report did not meet the standard of specificity required by Wood v. State, 375 So.2d 10 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Bohn v. State, 354 So.2d 1233 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

AFFIRMED.

WENTWORTH and JOANOS, JJ., and WOODIE A. LILES (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.

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

Lee v. State, 390 So. 2d 1195, 1980 Fla. App. LEXIS 23305 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

390 So. 2d 1195 (Lee v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Bohn v. State
354 So. 2d 1233 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1978)
Wood v. State
375 So. 2d 10 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)