Seth D. Disanto v. State

190 So. 3d 694, 2016 WL 2760033, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 7296
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 13, 2016·No. 5D15-2734·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Seth DiSanto seeks review of the, trial court’s summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence.' In his motion, DiSanto alleges that the trial court erred in relying on certain predicate convictions to support his adjudication as a habitual felony offender. The State properly concedes that the trial court’s order, which did not include any attachments, should be reversed. See Stewart v. State, 948 So.2d 870, 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). On remand, if the trial court agairt enters ah order summarily denying - DiSanto’s motion, it must attach written portions of the record conclusively refuting DiSanto’s claim,

REVERSED and RÉMANDED for further proceedings. ’

LAWSON C.J., PALMER and EVANDER,'JJ., concur.

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

Seth D. Disanto v. State, 190 So. 3d 694, 2016 WL 2760033, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 7296 (Fla. Ct. App. 2016).

190 So. 3d 694 (Seth D. Disanto v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Debritton M. Stevenson v. State
207 So. 3d 266 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)