EDUARDO VALENZUELA, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
PER CURIAM.
We have for review Valenzuela v. State, 764 So. 2d 777, 777 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), a per curiam decision of the First District Court of Appeal citing as controlling authority the Third District Court of Ap peal’s decision in Bover v. State, 732 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999), quashed, 797 So. 2d 1246 (Fla.2001). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.; Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418, 420 (Fla.1981).
In accordance with our opinion in Bover v. State, 797 So. 2d 1246 (Fla.2001), we quash the First District’s decision and remand this case to the First District for consideration in light of our recent decisions in Bover and Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173, 1180-81 (Fla.2001). In remanding this case, we express no opinion as to the merits of Valenzuela’s rule 3.800(a) claim.
It is so ordered.
WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bunkley v. State, 882 So. 2d 890 (Fla. 2004)…he finality of district court decisions.28 We allow challenges to illegal sentences to be made “at any time” under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), even when the result overturns a district court decision. See, e.g., Valenzuela v. State, 803 So. 2d 706 (Fla.2001) (quashing district court affirmance of denial of rule 3^800(a) motion and remanding for reconsideration in light of our decision quashing another district court affirmance). There are equal if not more compelling grounds for correcting il…
Authorities Cited
- Jollie v. State, 405 So. 2d 418 (Fla. 1981)
- Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173 (Fla. 2001)
- Bover v. State, 797 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 2001)
- Bover v. State, 732 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Valenzuela v. State, 764 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)