JOHNNY R. STANFORD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2002-04-03
No. 2D02-62
NORTHCUTT and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.
813 So. 2d 225 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2002) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
STRINGER, Judge.

STRINGER, Judge.

Johnny R. Stanford timely appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). He also timely appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm both of the trial court’s orders.

However, Stanford suggested in his initial brief that his postconviction motion argued that the oral pronouncement of his sentence by the trial court conflicts with the written judgment and sentence. It appears to this court that the issue as now phrased was not contained in Stanford’s motion for postconviction relief. Therefore, this issue is not properly before this court because it was not first raised in the trial court. This court’s affirmance is without prejudice to any right Stanford may have to file a facially sufficient motion to correct illegal sentence raising this issue with the trial court.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Cintron v. State, 827 So. 2d 1078 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
    …us documents that consisted primarily of calendar reports from the clerk of court. These documents do not clearly reflect the number of days Cintron was confined in jail on this case. [*1079] Recently this court issued an opinion in Harden v. State, 813 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), concerning the attachment of certain documents to orders denying jail credit. There we said that while these attachments allow us to make an educated guess about the defendant’s claim, “educated guessing is not the function of th…
  • Harden v. State, 829 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
    ….800(a). In his motion, Harden sought additional jail credit in trial cases 00-9702 and 00-10542. The trial court denied additional jail credit in one order that addressed both cases. Harden first appealed the trial court’s order in Harden v. State, 813 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). This court reversed and remanded for the trial court to attach documents that “clearly reflect the jail credit to which Harden is entitled and any jail documents supporting its denial of Harden’s motion.” Id. at 225. On remand, t…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw