JOSE PERALTA
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 Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence is not the proper remedy when the challenge concerns the terms of a negotiated plea agreement; such relief must be sought through a Rule 3.850 motion to set aside the plea.
[1] A Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence is not cognizable when the appellant's true challenge concerns the validity or terms of a negotiated plea agreement;…
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“while [appellant] sought relief under rule 3.800(a) to obtain correction of his sentence, he was actually challenging the terms of his plea agreement and the resulting convictions. As the sentence was the product of a negotiated plea, the remedy is not to correct the illegal sentence, but rather a motion under [rule] 3.850 to set aside the plea, vacate the judgment and sentence, and reinstitute all charges pending against [appellant] prior to entry of the plea.”
Haynes v. State, 106 So. 3d 481, 482 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013), cited as controlling authority
Jose Peralta appealed the trial court's denial of a Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence. The sentence was the product of a negotiated …
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 Negotiated Plea Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed March 13, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-2168 Lower Tribunal No. F89-27202B
________________
Jose Peralta,
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, Tanya Brinkley, Judge. Chase Law Florida, P.A., and Dane K. Chase (Saint Petersburg), for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Chief Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before LINDSEY, MILLER, and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM.
2
Affirmed. See Johnson v. State, 50 So. 3d 77, 78–79 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (affirming trial court’s denial of rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence without prejudice to permit appellant to seek relief through proper and timely motion to withdraw the plea under rule 3.850); State v. Huerta, 38 So. 3d 883, 885 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (finding appeal was not cognizable under rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence); see also Haynes v. State, 106 So. 3d 481, 482 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (“But while [appellant] sought relief under rule 3.800(a) to obtain correction of his sentence, he was actually challenging the terms of his plea agreement and the resulting convictions. As the sentence was the product of a negotiated plea, the remedy is not to correct the illegal sentence, but rather a motion under [rule] 3.850 to set aside the plea, vacate the judgment and sentence, and reinstitute all charges pending against [appellant] prior to entry of the plea.”) (internal citations omitted).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Haynes v. State, 106 So. 3d 481 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)
- Johnson v. State, 50 So. 3d 77 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)