ANDREW MARSHALL A/K/A HENRY FOUNTAIN,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA,

Fla. 3d DCA | 2021-12-15
No. 21-2067
Cabarga, J., Logue, J., Lindsey, J., Lobree, J.
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2021)

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 successive motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 must be denied.


Headnotes

[1] A successive motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 is not cognizable and must be denied.

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

Facts & Procedural History

Andrew Marshall, also known as Henry Fountain, filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence in a criminal case from Miami-Dade County. The trial cour…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Lobree

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed December 15, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-2067 Lower Tribunal No. F91-29266 ________________

Andrew Marshall a/k/a Henry Fountain, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Carmen Cabarga, Judge.

Andrew Marshall, a/k/a Henry Fountain, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, LINDSEY, and LOBREE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

2

Andrew James Marshall a/k/a/ Henry Fountain appeal’s the lower court’s denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. Because his motion is successive, we affirm. Marshall v. State, 235 So. 3d 879 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017); Marshall v. State, 224 So. 3d 229 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw