JOHN P. GORDON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
JOHN P. GORDON, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
828 So. 2d 443
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2002)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
John P. Gordon challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm.
In his motion, Gordon alleged that his plea was involuntary because defense counsel affirmatively misadvised him regarding the future sentencing-enhancing effects of the plea in regard to an as yet uncommitted crime. In Stansel v. State, 825 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), we held that this claim is not cognizable in a rule 3.850 motion. We certify the same question that we certified in Stansel. We affirm, without discussion, any other issues raised by Gordon in his motion.
ALTENBERND, WHATLEY, and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wilson v. State, 868 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…ine of laches may bar relief, we note that “Application of the doctrine often involves factual issues that are not properly resolved without an evidentiary hearing.” Love v. State, 814 So. 2d 475, 478 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); see also Williams v. State, 828 So. 2d 443 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. FULMER and STRINGER, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Stansel v. State, 825 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)