Mock v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Mock v. State

164 So. 3d 138, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 6989, 2015 WL 2189787

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 12, 2015

DocketNo. 1D15-327

StatusPublished

This text of 164 So. 3d 138 (Mock 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

Mock v. State, 164 So. 3d 138, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 6989, 2015 WL 2189787 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s motion to clarify sentence, but we do so without prejudice to Appellant filing a timely, facially sufficient rule 3.850 motion raising the claims alluded to in the motion concerning the representations allegedly made by Appellant’s trial counsel regarding the concurrent nature of Appellant’s Wakulla County and Leon County sentences and the impacts of those representations on Appellant’s decision to enter his plea.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s motion to clarify sentence, but we do so without prejudice to Appellant filing a timely, facially sufficient rule 3.850 motion raising the claims alluded to in the motion concerning the representations allegedly made by Appellant’s trial counsel regarding the concurrent nature of Appellant’s Wakulla County and Leon County sentences and the impacts of those representations on Appellant’s decision to enter his plea.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 So. 3d 138, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 6989, 2015 WL 2189787, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mock-v-state-fladistctapp-2015.