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

Wells v. State

696 So. 2d 1315, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8789, 1997 WL 402503
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Wells v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 9474 →
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 21, 1997·No. No. 97-0594·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order denying appellant’s motion to correct an illegal sentence, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), alleging his sentence is illegal because it departs from the guidelines without written reasons. King v. State, 681 So.2d 1136 (Fla.1996), Davis v. State, 661 So.2d 1193 (Fla.1995), and State v. Callaway, 658 So.2d 983 (Fla.1995). Our affirmance is without prejudice to appellant’s right to challenge the voluntariness of his plea by timely filing a motion which complies with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.

BOOTH, WOLF and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.

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

Wells v. State, 696 So. 2d 1315, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8789, 1997 WL 402503 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

696 So. 2d 1315 (Wells v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Callaway
658 So. 2d 983 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)
Davis v. State
661 So. 2d 1193 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)
King v. State
681 So. 2d 1136 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)