Weal v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Weal v. State

824 So. 2d 262, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11567, 2002 WL 1841545

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 14, 2002·No. No. 4D02-2240·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion to correct an allegedly illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). This affir-mance is without prejudice to appellant filing a timely, sworn motion pursuant to rule 3.850. To the extent of the issues raised in this appeal, such motion would be limited to the issues of whether the required prior .convictions for an enhanced sentence existed and were proven, and whether appellant was given sufficient notice of the state’s intent to seek an enhanced sentence. See McCray v. State, 765 So.2d 82 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 776 So.2d 276 (Fla.2000).

POLEN, C.J., STEVENSON and GROSS, 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 denial of appellant’s motion to correct an allegedly illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). This affir-mance is without prejudice to appellant filing a timely, sworn motion pursuant to rule 3.850. To the extent of the issues raised in this appeal, such motion would be limited to the issues of whether the required prior .convictions for an enhanced sentence existed and were proven, and whether appellant was given sufficient notice of the state’s intent to seek an enhanced sentence. See McCray v. State, 765 So.2d 82 (Fla. 4th DCA), rev. denied, 776 So.2d 276 (Fla.2000).

POLEN, C.J., STEVENSON and GROSS, JJ., concur.

Weal v. State, 824 So. 2d 262, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11567, 2002 WL 1841545 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

824 So. 2d 262 (Weal v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related