TERRY J. WILSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 3.800(A) cases and more on FLexlaw
[*344] PER CURIAM.
The appellant seeks review of the trial court’s summary denial of his rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence. A rule 3.800 motion can be the proper vehicle in which to raise a Hale claim more than two years after the verdict if the issue can be resolved from the face of the entire written record. See State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429, 433 (Fla.1998); West v. State, 790 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); Pullins v. State, 111 So. 2d 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000).
The record consists of the entire written record, not just the record on appeal. See Atwood v. State, 765 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Because the appellant was convicted by a jury, the trial court had at its disposal the trial transcript. Therefore, the trial court had at its disposal the record excerpts necessary to determine whether the appellant’s crimes occurred during a single criminal episode. Moreover, the trial court attached a copy of the facts of the appellant’s crimes as established during his trial. It is clear from those facts that the appellant’s convictions arose from a single criminal episode.
Reversed and remanded with directions to grant the relief sought.
ERVIN, BENTON, and POLSTON, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Jackson v. State, 803 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…e 3.850 motion, an evolving body of case law, including Mack, Valdes, and Allen, recognizes there may be instances where a Hale claim can be resolved from the face of “the record” without the need of an evidentiary hearing. See also Wilson v. State, 800 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). To raise an “illegal sentence” claim under Rule 3.800(a), 1) “[t]he error must have resulted in an illegal sentence,” 2) “[t]he error must appear on the face of the record,” and 3) “[t]he motion must affirmatively allege that ‘…
-
Boladares v. Olemshoe Corp. & The Hartford Ins. Co., 28 So. 3d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…PER CURIAM. Upon review of Appellant’s response to this court’s January 19, 2010, order to show cause, we DISMISS this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Mintz v. Broward Corr. Inst., 800 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (holding order merely granting employer/carrier’s motion to dismiss not an appealable final order); Truc v. Kimmins Corp., 889 So. 2d 964, 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (dismissing appeal of order granting employer/carrier’s motion to…
-
Johnson v. Moore, 801 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…eges that “[t]he record clearly shows this error.” See Pullins v. State, 777 So. 2d 451, 451 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Such a claim is cognizable under rule 3.800(a) as long as the court does not have to resort to extra-record facts. See Wilson v. State, 800 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“A rule 3.800 motion can be the proper vehicle in which to raise a Hale claim ... if the issue can be resolved from the face of the entire written record.”); Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 774, 776-77 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (holding t…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Mancino, 714 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1998)
- Valdes v. State, 765 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- West v. State, 790 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Forrest Atwood v. State, 765 So. 2d 242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)