Rodgers v. State

744 So. 2d 526, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 13341, 1999 WL 943021
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rodgers v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 804 So. 2d 480
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 8, 1999·No. No. 99-02430·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Timothy Rodgers appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm. Our affirmance, however, is without prejudice to Rodgers’ ability, if any, to file a motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to [527]*527Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 alleging that he does not have the requisite underlying convictions to support his habitual offender sentence under section 775.084, Florida Statutes (1997). See Judge v. State, 596 So.2d 73, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992) (en banc) (holding habitual offender sentence is illegal for purposes of rule 3.800(a) if a prior offense essential to categorize defendant as a habitual offender does not actually exist).

CAMBPELL, A.C.J., and BLUE and NORTHCUTT, JJ., Concur.

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

Rodgers v. State, 744 So. 2d 526, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 13341, 1999 WL 943021 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

744 So. 2d 526 (Rodgers v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Judge v. State
596 So. 2d 73 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)