JEFFREY AUSTIN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2004-05-12
No. 4D04-1193
STEVENSON, HAZOURI and MAY, JJ., concur.
874 So. 2d 47 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2004) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Topics
Successive Motions Direct Appeal Motion To Correct Illegal Sentence

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Successive Motions cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

[*48] PER CURIAM.

The order denying Defendant’s rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence is affirmed, but for reasons other than those expressed in the order on appeal.

The trial court found that the instant motion was successive to Defendant’s prior rule 3.800(a) motions; however, nothing in the summary record established that was so. Nevertheless, the denial is affirmed because the motion essentially challenged the validity of factors the trial court used to depart upward on resentencing, and its alleged refusal to consider factors in mitigation. If preserved, these challenges could have been raised in a direct appeal from the resentencing, but they are not claims of illegal sentence cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Carter v. State, 786 So. 2d 1173 (Fla.2001); Blakley v. State, 746 So. 2d 1182, 1187 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).

STEVENSON, HAZOURI and MAY, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Wright v. State, 126 So. 3d 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)
    …idity of the factors the trial court used to depart upward in sentencing, if preserved, can be raised in direct appeal from sentencing, but they are not claims of illegal sentence cognizable in a rule 3.800 or rule 3.850 motion. See Austin v. State, 874 So. 2d 47, 48 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004) (rule 3.800 motion); Pula v. State, 652 So. 2d 981, 982 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (rule 3.850 motion). Here, appellant did file a direct appeal from his conviction and sentence, which this court summarily affirmed. See Wright v. St…
  • Beaton v. State, 162 So. 3d 126 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)
    …ficers did not have to re-advise him of his Miranda rights. Beaton’s sentences are not illegal, and the grounds for departure cannot be challenged in a postconviction motion. See Wright v. State, 126 So. 3d 1204 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); Austin v. State, 874 So. 2d 47 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). We also disagree with Beaton that the trial court did not cite any valid grounds for an upward departure sentence. Having reviewed Beaton’s response to this Court’s order, we find that he has not shown any cause why sanctions…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw