Rangel v. State
101 So. 3d 911, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20195, 2012 WL 5870052
This text of 101 So. 3d 911 (Rangel 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
Rangel v. State, 101 So. 3d 911, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20195, 2012 WL 5870052 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).
Opinion
Affirmed. Our affirmance is without prejudice to Appellant raising his claims in a facially sufficient rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. Any such motion filed by Appellant shall not be considered successive so long as Appellant does not [912]*912revisit the issue that was the subject of the trial court’s June 11, 2012 order.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
101 So. 3d 911, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 20195, 2012 WL 5870052, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rangel-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.