Mitchell v. State
74 So. 3d 160, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 18122, 2011 WL 5557412
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Mitchell v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 20396 →
Opinion
In this direct appeal from his judgment and sentences, Joshua Mitchell challenges the imposition of sex offender probation *161 and his designation as a sexual predator. We affirm the judgment and sentences. However, our affirmance is without prejudice to Mr. Mitchell’s right to file a timely, facially sufficient motion in accordance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 3.850. See Nedd v. State, 855 So.2d 664 (Fla. 2d DCA2008).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mitchell v. State, 74 So. 3d 160, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 18122, 2011 WL 5557412 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).
74 So. 3d 160 (Mitchell v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Nedd v. State
855 So. 2d 664 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)