THOMAS R. JAMES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

Fla. 3d DCA | 2017-12-13
No. 3D17–1169
Before FERNANDEZ, LUCK and LINDSEY, JJ.
237 So. 3d 1058 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2017) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See State v. Harris, 129 So.3d 1166, 1168 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) ("Harris first argued in his 3.800(a) motion that the sentence for count 5 was illegal because the trial court did not orally pronounce the sentence.... [T]he record reflects that Harris completed these sentences. This issue is thus moot."); see also Miller v. State, 996 So.2d 954, 954 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) ("Christopher Miller seeks review of a trial court order denying his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because Appellant's sentence for grand theft has expired, his case is hereby dismissed as moot.").


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Young v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See James v. State, 237 So. 3d 1058 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (citing State v. Harris, 129 So. 3d 1166, 1168 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014) (“Harris first argued in his 3.800(a) motion that the sentence for count 5 was illegal because the trial court did not orally pronounce the sentence. . . . [T]he r…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw