Polmanteer v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Polmanteer v. State

557 So. 2d 678, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1268, 1990 WL 18479

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 2, 1990

DocketNo. 90-00350

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 557 So. 2d 678 (Polmanteer 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

Polmanteer v. State, 557 So. 2d 678, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1268, 1990 WL 18479 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Edward Polmanteer timely appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct or vacate sentence. Although we affirm the trial court’s denial of his motion, one of the points raised merits discussion.

Polmanteer contends that at sentencing, the court erred by considering in the guidelines scoresheet prior felony convictions that were contested by Polman-teer. Polmanteer correctly asserts that the court should have required the state to produce corroborating evidence of the challenged prior convictions. Delaine v. State, 486 So.2d 39 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). However, this matter should have been raised on direct appeal. Lomont v. State, 506 So.2d 1141 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).

Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the motion to vacate or correct sentence, without prejudice to Polmanteer seeking direct appellate review of the alleged error by way of a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See State v. Meyer, 430 So.2d 440 (Fla.1983); Baggett v. Wainwright, 229 So.2d 239 (Fla.1969).

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and HALL and THREADGILL, JJ., concur.

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