McNeil v. State

993 So. 2d 1030, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 774, 2008 WL 200321
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 25, 2008·No. No. 2D07-4732·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Elliot Antonio McNeil appeals the post-conviction court’s order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). To resolve Mr. McNeil’s claim requires factual determinations that are not apparent from the face of the record. Therefore, this claim may not be raised by a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Blocker v. State, 968 So.2d 686 (Fla. 2d DCA), review granted, 973 So.2d 1119, No. SC07-2292, 2007 WL 4864232 (Fla. Dec. 21, 2007).

Accordingly, we affirm the postconviction court’s denial order without prejudice to any right Mr. McNeil might have to file a timely and facially sufficient sworn motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Any such motion will not be deemed successive.

Affirmed.

ALTENBERND, WHATLEY, and STRINGER, JJ., concur.

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

McNeil v. State, 993 So. 2d 1030, 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 774, 2008 WL 200321 (Fla. Ct. App. 2008).

993 So. 2d 1030 (McNeil v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

BRYANT ALLEN CODY v. STATE OF FLORIDA
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2020
WILLLIE HARRIS v. STATE OF FLORIDA
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018
Harris v. State
242 So. 3d 1055 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018)
Anderson v. State
197 So. 3d 611 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Mosier v. State
141 So. 3d 631 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)