Lenoir v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lenoir v. State

900 So. 2d 770, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6518, 2005 WL 1027162

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 4, 2005·No. No. 3D04-3272·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Dale Lee Lenoir (“Lenoir”) appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to correct illegal sentence. This Court is unable to review the trial court’s denial of the motion because the written motion filed below can not be located. Because we cannot review the matter without an adequate record, we affirm the trial court’s order. Our affirmance is without prejudice to Lenoir’s right to file a renewed motion raising the same grounds within thirty days from the mandate. Such motion shall not be considered successive. See Brooks v. State, 789 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Dale Lee Lenoir (“Lenoir”) appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to correct illegal sentence. This Court is unable to review the trial court’s denial of the motion because the written motion filed below can not be located. Because we cannot review the matter without an adequate record, we affirm the trial court’s order. Our affirmance is without prejudice to Lenoir’s right to file a renewed motion raising the same grounds within thirty days from the mandate. Such motion shall not be considered successive. See Brooks v. State, 789 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).

Affirmed.

Lenoir v. State, 900 So. 2d 770, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6518, 2005 WL 1027162 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

900 So. 2d 770 (Lenoir v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related