Pereiro v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Pereiro v. State

656 So. 2d 278, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6696, 1995 WL 366697

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 21, 1995

DocketNo. 94-847

StatusPublished

This text of 656 So. 2d 278 (Pereiro 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

Pereiro v. State, 656 So. 2d 278, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6696, 1995 WL 366697 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

As appellant correctly concedes, the trial court’s denial of his motion, filed pursuant to Rule 3.850 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, must be affirmed due to the fact that it failed to contain the oath required by law.

This affirmance, however, is without prejudice to the refiling of a properly sworn motion in the trial court. See Love v. State, 623 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

As appellant correctly concedes, the trial court’s denial of his motion, filed pursuant to Rule 3.850 of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, must be affirmed due to the fact that it failed to contain the oath required by law.

This affirmance, however, is without prejudice to the refiling of a properly sworn motion in the trial court. See Love v. State, 623 So.2d 1221 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

656 So. 2d 278, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 6696, 1995 WL 366697, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pereiro-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack