ALPHONSO SEWARD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion To Correct Illegal Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the trial court’s denial of appellant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. Appellant’s motion did not demonstrate that he did not qualify for sentencing as a violent career criminal (VCC) and did not identify how the record establishes he is entitled to relief. See Bover v. State, 797 So. 2d 1246 (Fla.2001); Jackson v. State, 803 So. 2d 842, 844-45 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
The records identified by appellant demonstrate that he has sufficient prior convictions to qualify for sentencing under the VCC statute. § 775.084(l)(d)l, Fla. Stat. (1999). If appellant was not released from incarceration or supervision as a result of an enumerated felony within the requisite time frame, he must identify how court records demonstrate on their face an entitlement to relief. Bover, 797 So. 2d at 1248-49. See § 775.084(l)(d)3b, Fla. Stat. If he cannot, and an evidentiary hearing would be required to establish the date of his release, this claim may not be raised in a rule 3.800(a) motion.
POLEN, STEVENSON, and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Golden Vasquez v. State, 2 So. 3d 1126 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…d remand for the attachment of portions of the record that conclusively refute this claim. If an evidentiary hearing would be required to establish the date of her release, this claim may not be raised in a rule 3.800(a) motion. See Seward v. State, 990 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). Affirmed in part; reversed in parti cmd remanded. GROSS, C.J., POLEN and MAY, JJ., concur.…
-
Williams v. State, 44 So. 3d 1197 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…ne felony conviction prior to 1980, the reference to “burglary” in the habitual felony offender order is not as a single, predicate offense, but as the primary offense for which appellant received the habitual offender sentence. See Seward v. State, 990 So. 2d 655 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (explaining that to state a claim for relief from enhanced sentencing under Rule 3.800(a) the defendant must identify how the face of the record establishes that defendant does not qualify for the enhanced penalty); Ives v. State…
Authorities Cited
- Bover v. State, 797 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 2001)
- Jackson v. State, 803 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)