CHARLES LEON DORSEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
[*1083] GREEN, Judge.
Charles Leon Dorsey appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). In his motion, Dorsey alleged that he was entitled to relief pursuant to Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla.1993). We affirm the trial court’s order without prejudice to any right Dorsey might have to file a facially sufficient motion to correct illegal sentence alleging that the determination of whether his offenses were part of the same criminal episode could be made “without resort to extra-record facts.” Adams v. State, 755 So. 2d 678, 680 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
We affirm the denial of Dorsey’s remaining claims without comment.
Affirmed.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and STRINGER, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mack v. State, 805 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…on. These claims may be raised in a 3.800(a) motion if a court can determine from the face of the record whether his offenses were part of the same criminal episode. See Young v. State, 787 So. 2d 259, 260 [*916] (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Dorsey v. State, 795 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). The trial court denied Mack’s claims because the trial court erroneously believed that the claims could not be raised in a 3.800(a) motion. We reverse for the trial court to reconsider these claims in light of Young and Dorsey.…
Authorities Cited
- Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1993)
- Adams v. State, 755 So. 2d 678 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)