Ray v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Ray v. State

794 So. 2d 609, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 252, 2001 WL 38017

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 17, 2001

DocketNo. 4D00-3129

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 794 So. 2d 609 (Ray 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

Ray v. State, 794 So. 2d 609, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 252, 2001 WL 38017 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

David Ray appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He contends that the court erred in failing to apply the supreme court’s recent decision of Hayes v. State, 750 So.2d 1 (Fla.1999), to his conviction of trafficking in hydrocodone, possession of cannabis, possession of drug paraphernalia, and driving while his license was suspended. As we did in Klayman v. State, 765 So.2d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), we reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion for 3.850 relief and remand for an evidentiary hearing to determine the validity of his sentence pursuant to Hayes, and for resentencing if appropriate. We certify the same question as was certified in Klayman.

Reversed and remanded.

WARNER, C.J., POLEN and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

David Ray appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He contends that the court erred in failing to apply the supreme court’s recent decision of Hayes v. State, 750 So.2d 1 (Fla.1999), to his conviction of trafficking in hydrocodone, possession of cannabis, possession of drug paraphernalia, and driving while his license was suspended. As we did in Klayman v. State, 765 So.2d 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000), we reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion for 3.850 relief and remand for an evidentiary hearing to determine the validity of his sentence pursuant to Hayes, and for resentencing if appropriate. We certify the same question as was certified in Klayman.

Reversed and remanded.

WARNER, C.J., POLEN and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

794 So. 2d 609, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 252, 2001 WL 38017, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ray-v-state-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack