Mays v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mays v. State

88 So. 3d 332, 2012 WL 1520862, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6889

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 2, 2012

DocketNo. 4D10-313

StatusPublished

This text of 88 So. 3d 332 (Mays 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

Mays v. State, 88 So. 3d 332, 2012 WL 1520862, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6889 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We grant Justin Mays’ petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel so that the trial court may correct a scrivener’s error contained in the petitioner’s judgment. See Sinyard v. State, 799 So.2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); see also Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(d). Mays’ judgment incorrectly lists one of his charges as “Count 3” (Criminal Solicitation) instead of “Count 5” (also Criminal Solicitation). Count 3 of the information charged Mays’ codefendant— Hakam Sueliman — not Mays. Mays, however, was charged with Criminal Solicitation under Count 5. We direct the trial court to enter a corrected judgment. The remaining claims raised are denied without comment.

Petition Granted in part; Denied in part; and Remanded.

HAZOURI, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We grant Justin Mays’ petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel so that the trial court may correct a scrivener’s error contained in the petitioner’s judgment. See Sinyard v. State, 799 So.2d 1067 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); see also Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(d). Mays’ judgment incorrectly lists one of his charges as “Count 3” (Criminal Solicitation) instead of “Count 5” (also Criminal Solicitation). Count 3 of the information charged Mays’ codefendant— Hakam Sueliman — not Mays. Mays, however, was charged with Criminal Solicitation under Count 5. We direct the trial court to enter a corrected judgment. The remaining claims raised are denied without comment.

Petition Granted in part; Denied in part; and Remanded.

HAZOURI, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

88 So. 3d 332, 2012 WL 1520862, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 6889, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mays-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack