BRAD EVANS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2009-02-06
No. 5D08-1470
MONACO, LAWSON and COHEN, JJ., concur.
1 So. 3d 1195 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2009)


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Brad Evans appeals the denial of his motion brought pursuant to rule 3.800(a) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, which alleged three grounds for relief. One of Evans’ arguments is that it was illegal under Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 621 (Fla.1993), to impose habitual felony offender, (“HFO”), sentences of life consecutive to a non-HFO life sentence when all of his charges arose from a single criminal episode. We affirm the denial of this claim without prejudice to Evans’ right to again seek relief in the trial court through *1196a rule 3.800(a) motion that specifically identifies non-hearsay, record evidence supporting Evans’ claim of a Hale violation. See Taylor v. State, 969 So.2d 489 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Jones v. State, 894 So.2d 1070 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). In the event that Evans does file a future motion, we direct the trial court’s attention to Fuller v. State, 867 So.2d 469 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 887 So.2d 1236 (Fla. 2004). We affirm the trial court’s order as it relates to Evans’ other grounds for relief without further comment.

AFFIRMED.

MONACO, LAWSON and COHEN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw