Shea v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Shea v. State

884 So. 2d 453, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 14637, 2004 WL 2237053

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 6, 2004

DocketNo. 2D03-541

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 884 So. 2d 453 (Shea 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

Shea v. State, 884 So. 2d 453, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 14637, 2004 WL 2237053 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

John Shea appeals a judgment for armed trafficking in cocaine, conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, carrying a concealed firearm, possession of cocaine, possession of methamphetamine, and possession of al-prazolam. We affirm the convictions without further comment. On appeal, Mr. Shea has raised issues regarding his sentence for armed trafficking. These issues were not raised at sentencing nor did Mr. Shea’s appellate counsel file a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) to preserve these issues for review. As a result, we conclude that these issues cannot be addressed in this appeal. See Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89, 98 (Fla.2000); cf. Harvey v. State, 848 So.2d 1060 (Fla.2003) (refusing to apply Maddox to preclude direct review of “a sentencing error [that] developed that did not exist before the first brief was filed”). We therefore affirm Mr. Shea’s sentence for armed trafficking without prejudice to his right to file an appropriate motion for postconviction relief.

ALTENBERND, C.J., and WHATLEY and CANADY, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

John Shea appeals a judgment for armed trafficking in cocaine, conspiracy to traffic in cocaine, carrying a concealed firearm, possession of cocaine, possession of methamphetamine, and possession of al-prazolam. We affirm the convictions without further comment. On appeal, Mr. Shea has raised issues regarding his sentence for armed trafficking. These issues were not raised at sentencing nor did Mr. Shea’s appellate counsel file a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) to preserve these issues for review. As a result, we conclude that these issues cannot be addressed in this appeal. See Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89, 98 (Fla.2000); cf. Harvey v. State, 848 So.2d 1060 (Fla.2003) (refusing to apply Maddox to preclude direct review of “a sentencing error [that] developed that did not exist before the first brief was filed”). We therefore affirm Mr. Shea’s sentence for armed trafficking without prejudice to his right to file an appropriate motion for postconviction relief.

ALTENBERND, C.J., and WHATLEY and CANADY, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

884 So. 2d 453, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 14637, 2004 WL 2237053, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shea-v-state-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack