Stretcher v. State
This text of 803 So. 2d 813 (Stretcher 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.
Opinion
Lester STRETCHER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Lester Stretcher, Atlanta, Georgia, pro se.
No appearance required for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the denial of appellant's rule 3.850 motion and certify as a question of great public importance the same question certified in Major v. State, 790 So.2d 550, 552 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001):
WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT OR COUNSEL HAVE A DUTY TO ADVISE A DEFENDANT THAT HIS PLEA IN A PENDING CASE MAY HAVE SENTENCE ENHANCING CONSEQUENCES IF THE DEFENDANT COMMITS A NEW CRIME IN THE FUTURE?
KLEIN, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
803 So. 2d 813, 2001 WL 1614138, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stretcher-v-state-fladistctapp-2001.