McNulty v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McNulty v. State

831 So. 2d 221, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15181, 2002 WL 31323367

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 18, 2002

DocketNo. 2D01-4490

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 831 So. 2d 221 (McNulty 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

McNulty v. State, 831 So. 2d 221, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15181, 2002 WL 31323367 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Micky William McNulty challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm.

In his motion, McNulty alleged that his plea was involuntary because defense counsel affirmatively misadvised him regarding the future sentencing-enhancing effects of the plea in regard to an as yet uncommitted crime. In Stansel v. State, 825 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), we held that this claim is not cognizable in a rule 3.850 motion. We certify the same question that we certified in Stansel We affirm, without discussion, any other issues raised by McNulty in his motion.

ALTENBERND, WHATLEY, and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Micky William McNulty challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm.

In his motion, McNulty alleged that his plea was involuntary because defense counsel affirmatively misadvised him regarding the future sentencing-enhancing effects of the plea in regard to an as yet uncommitted crime. In Stansel v. State, 825 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), we held that this claim is not cognizable in a rule 3.850 motion. We certify the same question that we certified in Stansel We affirm, without discussion, any other issues raised by McNulty in his motion.

ALTENBERND, WHATLEY, and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

831 So. 2d 221, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15181, 2002 WL 31323367, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcnulty-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack