Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Valenzuela v. State

Valenzuela v. State

813 So. 2d 962, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1339, 2002 WL 192326
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 8, 2002
DocketNo. 1D00-0816
StatusPublished

This text of 813 So. 2d 962 (Valenzuela 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
Valenzuela v. State, 813 So. 2d 962, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1339, 2002 WL 192326 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. The appellant’s motion to correct illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) does not affirmatively allege that a prior offense essential to categorize him as a habitual offender does not exist, see Judge v. State, [963]*963596 So.2d 73, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), rev. denied, 613 So.2d 5 (Fla.1992), and that the court records will demonstrate a clear entitlement to relief, see Baker v. State, 714 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).

BARFIELD, KAHN, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Baker v. State
714 So. 2d 1167 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Judge v. State
596 So. 2d 73 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
813 So. 2d 962, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1339, 2002 WL 192326, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/valenzuela-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.