ROBERT O. LITTLE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the defendant's motion for post-conviction relief was facially insufficient because it failed to identify specific reasons for departure from sentencing guidelines and relate them to invalidating supreme court decisions.
The defendant appealed the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief, which challenged his departure sentence under sentencing guidelines. The t…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Facial Insufficiency Of Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
ZEHMER, Judge.
Robert O. Little appeals the trial court’s denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. The motion challenges the legality of his departure sentence under the sentencing guidelines on grounds that the stated reasons for departure have been held invalid by the supreme court since the affirmance of his sentence on appeal. Little v. State, 474 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), rev. den., 484 So. 2d 9 (Fla.1986). The trial court denied the motion, checking from among numerous recited grounds on a form order the following two explicit grounds:
The Defendant in the case sub judice attempts by motion under Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, to re-try issues previously litigated on direct appeal.
Defendant’s motion contains matter raised on direct appeal and may not form a basis of collateral act by said Motion for Post Conviction Relief.
The validity of Little’s sentence and the reasons for departure from the sentencing guidelines were raised and determined on direct appeal. This would ordinarily be thought to place these issues at rest. We are mindful that sentences which have been rendered illegal by subsequent decisions of the supreme court are subject to collateral attack by rule 3.850 motion, see Hall v. State, 511 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); therefore, the stated basis for the trial court’s ruling is probably no longer sound.
We conclude, however, that Little’s motion is facially insufficient to warrant any relief. It does not identify the specific reasons recited for departure by the trial judge and relate each such reason to a supreme court decision holding that specific reason invalid. The motion wholly fails to demonstrate any basis for concluding that Little’s sentence has been rendered illegal by subsequent supreme court decisions.
AFFIRMED.
JOANOS and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Deese v. State, 530 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…1 (Fla. 1985) (motion not under oath as required by rule 3.850 was properly denied). Since the motion is facially insufficient, no relief could be granted under rule 3.850. Rowe v. State, 474 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); see also Little v. State, 512 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). We cannot determine whether the motion is sufficient to state grounds for relief under rule 3.800. Some of the grounds alleged to have been cited by the trial court appear to be invalid under the cases cited by appellant, so th…
-
Little v. State, 533 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…h such reason to a supreme court decision holding that specific reason invalid. The motion wholly fails to demonstrate any basis for concluding that Little’s sentence has been rendered illegal by subsequent supreme court decisions. Little v. State, 512 So. 2d 231 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) (“Little II”). Accordingly, the order denying the motion to vacate was affirmed. [*297] Subsequently, Little filed another motion to vacate his sentence. The trial court’s order of denial (the order which is the subject of this a…
Authorities Cited
- Hall v. State, 511 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Little v. State, 474 So. 2d 331 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)