Martinez v. State
904 So. 2d 473, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6477, 2005 WL 1027147
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Martinez v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 851 So. 2d 832 →
Opinion
We affirm the order denying defendant’s motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Defendant’s vindictive sentencing claim may not be raised in a motion to correct illegal sentence. See Gonzalez v. State, 897 So.2d 551 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Reese v. State, 896 So.2d 807 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Wright v. State, 891 So.2d 618 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Bouno v. State, 900 So.2d 672 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Martinez v. State, 904 So. 2d 473, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6477, 2005 WL 1027147 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).
904 So. 2d 473 (Martinez v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Bouno v. State
900 So. 2d 672 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Reese v. State
896 So. 2d 807 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Wright v. State
891 So. 2d 618 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Gonzalez v. State
897 So. 2d 551 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)