JOEL DON ADAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Retention Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
[*885] PER CURIAM.
Appellant Joel Don Adams appeals the summary denial of his Motion to Correct Sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. He was convicted of armed robbery, kidnapping, sexual battery (three counts), attempted first degree murder, and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He sought correction of his sentence because the court retained jurisdiction for one-third of his sentence (a period of 65 years) without stating with individual particularity his justifications for so doing as required by Section 947.16(3)(a), Florida Statutes. The trial judge denied the appellant’s motion on the basis that he had previously denied a motion to correct illegal sentence and that this court had decided this issue in affirming the judgment and sentence on February 17, 1984. Adams v. State, 447 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). We affirm.
The appellant contested the legality of his sentence in this appeal and in two previous Rule 3.800 motions in the trial court. Although neither the trial judge nor this court has ever considered the illegality of the court’s retaining jurisdiction over the defendant without stating the justification with individual particularity, the appellant could have raised this issue on direct appeal. He is now precluded from raising this issue via a Rule 3.800 motion. Pedroso v. State, 420 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). See also State v. Snow, 462 So. 2d 455 (Fla.1985).
The trial court’s denial of the Rule 3.800 motion is therefore affirmed.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and OTT and DANAHY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Styles v. State, 465 So. 2d 1369 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)…of the trial [*1371] court’s failure to state its reasons for retaining jurisdiction on a motion for post-conviction relief because this procedural issue may always be raised on direct appeal. Thus, Pedroso retains its validity. See Adams v. State, 462 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). We also note that Snow would apparently alter this court’s decision in Alexander v. State, 425 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), as to addressing on appeal the procedural problem of the failure to state reasons for retention where…
-
Senior v. State, 502 So. 2d 1360 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)…en raised on a direct appeal. See Efraimson v. State, 493 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Richardson v. State, 491 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 1st DCA), dismissed, 500 So. 2d 545 (Fla.1986); Chippas v. State, 482 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Adams v. State, 462 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Exceptions to this rule are provided by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), as recently amended by the Florida Supreme Court in the case of State v. Whitfield, 487 So. 2d 1045 (Fla.1986), as follows: (a) A court may at…
-
Thompson v. Wade, 603 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…on its own, as we did in this case. Because this issue was not cognizable in Thompson’s direct appeal at the time of that appeal, Thompson may seek relief in the trial court pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800, see Adams v. State, 462 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 2d DCA1985). PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS DENIED. JOANOS, C.J., and KAHN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Snow, 462 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 1985)
- Amado L. Pedroso v. State, 420 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)
- Smiley Vincent Keene v. State, 420 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)