ALFIE STINSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Habitual Felony Offender Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges his habitual felony offender sentence imposed for his conviction of trafficking in cocaine. See § 893.135(1)(b)1.a., Fla. Stat. (1997). The trial court committed an error, previously considered fundamental, in imposing this sentence. See Stanford v. State, 706 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Clay v. State, 750 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). However, because appellant’s appointed counsel filed his initial brief after the effective date of the amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b), appellant is precluded from raising this issue for the first time on appeal. See Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla.2000); Harvey v. State, 786 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001), reh’g denied and questions certified, 786 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Malone v. State, 777 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
Accordingly, we affirm the appellant’s conviction and sentence without prejudice to the appellant’s right to seek appropriate post-conviction relief.
BOOTH, KAHN, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cillo v. State, 849 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…ure from the room. In relation to the third Ramirez factor, Detective lorio did inform Mr. Cilio of the victim’s allegations. However, this factor standing alone does not support the conclusion that Mr. Cilio was in custody. See State v. Rodriguez, 785 So. 2d 759, 761 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (holding that appellee was not in custody when he was questioned at the police station and confronted with incriminating recorded phone calls). The fourth factor in Ramirez is whether the suspect is informed that he or she i…
-
Rigterink v. State, 2 So. 3d 221 (Fla. 2009)…he defendant of the voluntary nature of the interview and his or her ability to leave. See, e.g., Meredith, 964 So. 2d at 249, 252 (defendant informed that he was not under arrest and that the interview was “strictly voluntary”); State v. Rodriguez, 785 So. 2d 759, 760-61 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (defendant informed that “he was free, to leave at any time”). None of the detectives so informed Rigterink. If an interview is truly “voluntary,” then it is difficult to understand why any interviewing detective would not…
-
Washington v. State, 814 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…les adopted by the Florida Supreme Court to implement the Criminal Appeal Reform Act of 1996,5 it appears we must affirm Washington’s convictions and sentence, without prejudice for him to seek ■ appropriate post-conviction relief. Stinson v. State, 785 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Durr v. State, 773 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). We reach this conclusion, however, with misgivings and concerns for how we as an appellate court can faithfully carry out our constitutional duties pursuant to Anders and Cause…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Maddox v. State, 760 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2000)
- Gregor v. Gregor, 786 So. 2d 28 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Harvey v. State, 786 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Elmario Clay v. State, 750 So. 2d 153 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Stanford v. State, 706 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Lanora Malone v. State, 777 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)