ANDRES ZAMORA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
An order denying a motion to reduce sentence under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(c) is unappealable.
The defendant, having violated a cooperation agreement, moved to reduce his sentence based on substantial assistance. The trial court denied the motio…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Cooperation Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge.
After the defendant had been sentenced without objection1 in accordance with the terms of a cooperation agreement which he admittedly violated, he filed a motion to reduce the sentence on the ground that, although not to the extent required by the agreement, he had “substantially assisted” the police. The trial court denied the motion without an evidentiary hearing and the defendant appeals.
We conclude that the order on review, which is essentially one denying a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) motion to reduce sentence — essentially the same as one denying what was formerly called a motion to mitigate under Rule 3.800(b) — is unappealable. See Clewis v. State, 715 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Oser v. State, 699 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Ziegler v. State, 380 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The appeal is therefore dismissed without prejudice to an appropriate application for post-conviction relief, if any.
Appeal dismissed.
. At the sentencing hearing, when asked if the defendant had anything to say, Zamora’s attorney replied:
Well, Judge, I would love to be heard. Unfortunately, I don’t know if there is much that I can say. There's a contract that was signed by Mr. Zamora.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Riggs v. State, 847 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…ere the trial court procedurally erred, e.g., by mistakenly basing the denial on a finding of untimeliness. The State correctly notes that an order denying a motion to mitigate sentence is not a directly appealable order. See, e.g., Zamora v. State, 810 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Oser v. State, 699 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); Lee v. State, 662 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Daniels v. State, 568 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (dismissing based on finding that district court lacked jurisdiction to revie…
-
Greer v. State, 985 So. 2d 1121 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…[*1122] PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Zamora v. State, 810 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).…
Authorities Cited
- Ziegler v. State, 380 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- CSC Realty P'rs, Inc. v. Gallagher-Cole Assocs., Inc., 699 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- Oser v. State, 699 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997)
- Debello v. Faske, 715 So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)