Stone v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Stone v. State

461 So. 2d 989, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2647, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16270

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 17, 1984

DocketNo. BA-116

StatusPublished

This text of 461 So. 2d 989 (Stone 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

Stone v. State, 461 So. 2d 989, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2647, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16270 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

MILLS, Judge.

Stone appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. He alleges in his motion that he received a five-year sentence in violation of a plea agreement, wherein it was agreed that he would receive a 2lk to Zlh year sentence in return for his guilty plea. We affirm.

To its order denying the motion, the trial court attached a copy of the “waiver and plea” form signed by Stone. That form set forth the following plea agreement: “[I]n exchange for the defendant’s plea of guilty, the state agrees to the defendant’s present violation of probation charge to run concurrently with the sentence he receives on this charge.” Because the duration of the sentence Stone would receive was not a part of the plea agreement, he was not sentenced in violation thereof.

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

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

MILLS, Judge.

Stone appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. He alleges in his motion that he received a five-year sentence in violation of a plea agreement, wherein it was agreed that he would receive a 2lk to Zlh year sentence in return for his guilty plea. We affirm.

To its order denying the motion, the trial court attached a copy of the “waiver and plea” form signed by Stone. That form set forth the following plea agreement: “[I]n exchange for the defendant’s plea of guilty, the state agrees to the defendant’s present violation of probation charge to run concurrently with the sentence he receives on this charge.” Because the duration of the sentence Stone would receive was not a part of the plea agreement, he was not sentenced in violation thereof.

AFFIRMED.

SHIVERS and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

461 So. 2d 989, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2647, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16270, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stone-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.