MICHAEL SUTTON, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (11 total)

• Emmet Black v. State, 914 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
  …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. State v. Williams, 854 So. 2d 215, 217 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); McCraney v. State, 830 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002); Wiley v. State, 604 So. 2d 6, 7 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Ferenc v. State, 563 So. 2d 707 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). STEVENSON, C.J., STONE and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.…
• Cook v. State, 885 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
  …ent on the face of the record, and, therefore, is not cognizable in a Rule 3.800(a) motion. We agree. Cook is challenging his convictions, not his sentences, and such a claim cannot be asserted in a Rule 3.800(a) motion. See e.g., State v. Williams, 854 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), review denied, 869 So. 2d 541 (Fla.2004); State v. Moten, 698 So. 2d 1345 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), review dismissed, 799 So. 2d 218 (Fla.2001). Finding no error in the trial court’s order, we affirm. AFFIRMED. SHARP, W. and PE…
• George v. State, 213 So. 3d 966 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
  …itute multiple punishment (sic) for the same offense(s).” In a very thorough order, the trial court properly denied relief. Double jeopardy challenges to a defendant’s convictions are not cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion. See State v. Williams, 854 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Here, Appellant is attempting to challenge his convictions, not his sentences, because “although couched as an attack on his sentences, [the appellant’s claims are] inherently attacking his convictions because correcting the all…

Authorities Cited

• Johnson v. State, 529 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)