JERMETRAS WATSON
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 5th DCA | 2018-12-28
No. 18-2610
Kest, J., Orfinger, J., Evander, J., Lambert, J.
260 So. 3d 1180 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2018)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Holding

A postconviction court's summary denial of a Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence is affirmed when issues are raised for the first time on appeal without prior presentation to the lower court.

Headnotes

[1] Issues not presented to the trial court with specific legal arguments are not preserved for appellate review, but a defendant may file a successive Rule 3.800(a) motion t…

Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence
Key Quotes

“In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.”

Court citing Tillman v. State regarding preservation of issues for appellate review
Facts & Procedural History

Jermetras Watson appealed a postconviction court's order denying his Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence. Watson raised several issues…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Topics
Correction Of Sentence Invitee Status Successive Postconviction Motions Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.800(A) Motion To Correct Illegal Sentence

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Correction Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
Lambert

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

JERMETRAS WATSON,

Appellant,

v. Case No. 5D18-2610

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

________________________________/

Opinion filed December 28, 2018

3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, John Marshall Kest, Judge.

Jermetras Watson, Lake Butler, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Roark Wall, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm, without further discussion, the postconviction court’s order summarily denying Appellant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. Appellant also raised several issues in his Initial Brief that were not presented below and thus were not preserved for review. See Tillman v. State, 471 So. 2d 32, 35 (Fla. 1985) (“In order to be preserved for further review by a higher court, an issue must

AFFIRMED.

ORFINGER, EVANDER, and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.

Footnotes
2 be presented to the lower court and the specific legal argument or ground to be argued on appeal or review must be part of that presentation if it is to be considered preserved.”). Appellant is not precluded from filing a successive rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence to raise issues discussed in his Initial Brief that were not argued in his present motion. See State v. McBride, 848 So. 2d 287, 290-91 (Fla. 2003) (holding that the phrase “at any time” in rule 3.800(a) allows defendants to file successive motions but that principles of collateral estoppel bar a defendant from raising in a successive motion to correct illegal sentence the same issue raised by the defendant in an earlier motion). We take no present position as to the merits, if any, of these potential claims.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw