SAMUEL M. PULLINS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Samuel M. Pullins, appeals the denial of his rule 3.800(a) motion. He claims that his consecutive habitual offender sentence is illegal under Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla.1993). This Court has held that Hale claims are cognizable in 3.800(a) motions if the claim can be established on the face of the record. See Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). As Appellant has failed to point to any part of the record which establishes that the crimes were committed in a single episode, we affirm the trial court’s denial of relief. See Baker v. State, 714 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
ERVIN, BOOTH and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson v. State, 803 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…rsed in part and remanded for trial court to determine under rule 3.800(a) whether claim could be resolved from face of record); West v. State, 790 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); Davis v. State, 784 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Pullins v. State, 777 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“Hale claims are cognizable in 3.800(a) motions if the claim can be established on the face of the record.”); Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Indeed, the district court’s Callaway opinion, which was approved…
-
Theophile v. State, 967 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)…03 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (holding that a Hale claim under rule 3.800(a) requires more than a general allegation, and claim must cite to facts based on court records that demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief); Pullins v. State, 777 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (affirming trial court’s denial of Hale claim where 3.800(a) motion failed to point to record facts demonstrating crimes were committed in a single episode). We therefore affirm, without prejudice to Appellant’s ability to file a…
-
Elliott v. State, 9 So. 3d 660 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…21 (Fla.1993). The trial court denied this motion on two grounds. First, the trial court found that Elliott’s motion failed to point to any record facts showing that both charges were committed in a single criminal episode, citing Pullins tí. State, 777 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Notwithstanding this pleading failure, the trial court proceeded to address the merits of his motion. • The trial court concluded Hale did not apply because even though it found Elliott met the criteria for being sentenced as a…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1993)
- Williamson v. Penni Lane Williamson, 714 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- Baker v. State, 714 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)