ISAAC BOSTIC, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Habitual Offender Adjudication cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court found that appellant’s motion was facially insufficient in that it did not contain the information required by rule 3.850(c), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, did not allege that he would not have been adjudged a habitual offender absent the stipulation, and did not set forth the mitigation factors which should have been considered at sentencing. We agree and affirm. See Mitchell v. State, 581 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Ricco v. State, 474 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).
Because the time for filing a rule 3.850 motion has not yet run, our affirmance is without prejudice to the appellant’s ability to file a second, sufficiently detailed motion. Davis v. State, 627 So. 2d 112, 113 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993).
DELL, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and STONE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Colandro Peters v. State, 769 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…objection to the racial composition of the jury venire. We affirm the denial, but without prejudice to Appellant’s right to refile within thirty days of this court’s mandate a second sufficiently detailed motion on this claim only. Bostic v. State, 631 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Davis v. State, 627 So. 2d 112, 113 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. STONE, KLEIN, and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Davis v. State, 627 So. 2d 112 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
- Mitchell v. State, 581 So. 2d 990 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Ricco v. State, 474 So. 2d 327 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)