Maddox v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Maddox v. State

673 So. 2d 198, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5140, 1996 WL 257364

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 17, 1996

DocketNo. 96-721

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 673 So. 2d 198 (Maddox 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

Maddox v. State, 673 So. 2d 198, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 5140, 1996 WL 257364 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Aldric D. Maddox appeals an order denying his Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence. Maddox’s motion alleges that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to properly advise Maddox before he entered his guilty plea.

Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are not cognizable in a Rule 3.800 proceeding. See, e.g:, Wiley v. State, 632 So.2d 721 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Additionally, construing Maddox’s motion as a Rule 3.850 motion would not be helpful since the motion would [199]*199be denied as successive and an abuse of procedure.

AFFIRMED.

PETERSON, C.J., and DAUKSCH and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

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