DIEGO JIMENEZ
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) is not available where the defendant seeks to challenge the validity of the underlying conviction.
[1] A motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) is unavailable where the motion challenges the validity of the underlying convic…
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“a motion to correct illegal sentence is an appropriate procedure for challenging a sentence, but not a conviction”
Morgan v. State, citing the distinction between Rule 3.800(a) motions and conviction challenges
Diego Jimenez, who had previously filed at least seventeen appeals or original proceedings from his conviction in case number F00-38717, filed a motio…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Direct Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed November 1, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D22-1906 Lower Tribunal No. F00-38717
________________
Diego Jimenez,
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. Law Offices of Michelle Walsh, P.A., and Michelle R. Walsh, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and David Llanes, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before EMAS, MILLER and LOBREE, JJ. EMAS, J. Diego Jimenez has previously filed at least seventeen appeals or original proceedings stemming from his conviction and sentence in circuit court case number F00-38717. Here, Jimenez appeals the trial court’s order denying his “Motion to Correct an Unlawful Sentence” pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a).
However, while styled a motion to correct an illegal sentence, the motion is in fact a challenge to both the conviction and the sentence. A motion under rule 3.800(a) is not available where, as here, the defendant seeks to challenge the validity of the conviction (and, only by extension, the “legality” of the sentence). See Ramirez v. State, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D1823, 2022 WL 3903532 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 31, 2022); Planas v. State, 271 So. 3d 76 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019); Lopez v. State, 2 So. 3d 1057, 1059 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Morgan v. State, 888 So. 2d 128, 129 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (acknowledging “a motion to correct illegal sentence is an appropriate procedure for challenging a sentence, but not a conviction”); Coughlin v. State, 932 So. 2d 1224, 1226 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that “a traditional double jeopardy challenge attacks both the conviction and, by default, the sentence, while rule 3.800(a) is limited to claims that a sentence itself is illegal, without regard to the underlying conviction”). Jimenez could have and should have raised the instant claim on direct appeal from his conviction and sentence or, if appropriate, by a timely motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. His attempt to present such a challenge under rule 3.800(a) (which, unlike rule 3.850, has no time limitation) is unauthorized.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jimenez v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)…and the sentence. A motion under rule 3.800(a) is not available where, as here, the defendant seeks to challenge the validity of the conviction (and, only by extension, the “legality” of the sentence). See Ramirez v. State, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D1823, 2022 WL 3903532 (Fla. 3d DCA Aug. 31, 2022); Planas v. State, 271 So. 3d 76 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019); Lopez v. State, 2 So. 3d 1057, 1059 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Morgan v. State, 888 So. 2d 128, 129 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004) (acknowledging “a motion to correct illegal sentence is a…
-
Roque Esteban Calafell v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)
Authorities Cited
- Coughlin v. State, 932 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)
- Lopez v. State, 2 So. 3d 1057 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)
- D.A. v. Fla. Dep't of Child. & Families, 888 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004)
- Torin Robinson v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)
- Eniel Planas v. State, 321 So. 3d 217 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)
- Jimenez v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)