Suber v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Suber v. State

827 So. 2d 1043, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14521, 2002 WL 31250565

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 9, 2002

DocketNo. 2D02-3040

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 827 So. 2d 1043 (Suber 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

Suber v. State, 827 So. 2d 1043, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14521, 2002 WL 31250565 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying Jack H. Suber’s motion to correct an illegal sentence, which was filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Mr. Súber argues that the portion of his sentence that imposes a three-year minimum mandatory term of imprisonment for possession of a firearm as a convicted felon is illegal. He believes that language in section 790.23, Florida Statutes (2000), somehow overrides the mandatory sentence provided in section 775.087(2)(l)(r), Florida Statutes (2000). We conclude that his sentence is not illegal.

We write primarily because the trial court denied this motion on the ground that Mr. Súber had not preserved this issue by raising it at the sentencing hearing or by a motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). Preservation of a sentencing issue is generally required for review in a direct appeal. There is no requirement that a sentencing issue be preserved for examination as an illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a).

Affirmed,

PARKER, ALTENBERND, and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order denying Jack H. Suber’s motion to correct an illegal sentence, which was filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Mr. Súber argues that the portion of his sentence that imposes a three-year minimum mandatory term of imprisonment for possession of a firearm as a convicted felon is illegal. He believes that language in section 790.23, Florida Statutes (2000), somehow overrides the mandatory sentence provided in section 775.087(2)(l)(r), Florida Statutes (2000). We conclude that his sentence is not illegal.

We write primarily because the trial court denied this motion on the ground that Mr. Súber had not preserved this issue by raising it at the sentencing hearing or by a motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). Preservation of a sentencing issue is generally required for review in a direct appeal. There is no requirement that a sentencing issue be preserved for examination as an illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a).

Affirmed,

PARKER, ALTENBERND, and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

827 So. 2d 1043, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14521, 2002 WL 31250565, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/suber-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack