MICHEAL HOGAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Successive Motions cases and more on FLexlaw
Hogan appeals from the summary denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), seeking to correct an illegal sentence. Below, Hogan filed a “motion for declaratory judgment,” asserting his life sentence is illegal because “it violates his constitutional right against an indefinite sentence.” The trial court treated the motion as one filed pursuant to Rule 3.800(a) and denied it as successive because Hogan had raised this same issue in a prior Rule 3.800(a) motion, which was resolved adversely to him on the merits. See Hogan v. State, 826 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
By packaging the same legal issue in a different form or format, a party or defendant cannot avoid the impact of the law of the case doctrine: the finality of legal issues once pursued on the merits, to their ultimate conclusion. See State v. McBride, 848 So. 2d 287 (Fla.2003); Knox v. State, 873 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), cause dism., 884 So. 2d 22 (Fla.2004). This motion was properly summarily denied by the trial court because it is clearly successive and improper. We warn Hogan against filing additional improper pleadings seeking to raise this issue in the future.
AFFIRMED.
SAWAYA, C.J. and MONACO, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Taylor v. State, 969 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007)…lly sufficient rule 3.800(a) claim asserting a Hale violation, the defendant must identify with particularity the non-hearsay record documents that support his claim. See, e.g., Lauramore v. State, 949 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); Jones v. State, 894 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Speas v. State, 887 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). We adopt this pleading standard. We believe that this standard will discourage defendants from filing obviously frivolous motions and will ensure that busy trial judges do not h…
-
Jackson v. State, 916 So. 2d 37 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…file a rule 3.800(a) motion raising his [*38] Hale1 challenge if he can demonstrate in that motion that he is entitled to relief without the need for an evidentiary hearing and that entitlement is clear on the face of the record. See Jones v. State, 894 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Nelson v. State, 855 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). STEVENSON, C.J., KLEIN and TAYLOR, JJ., concur. . Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 909, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994).…
-
Hogan v. State, 984 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)…purported unconstitutionality of his life sentence as an improper indefinite sentence. The trial court denied both of these motions, and this court affirmed per cu-riam. See Hogan v. State, 826 So. 2d 317 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (table); Hogan v. State, 894 So. 2d 1070, 1071 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (“We warn Hogan against filing additional improper pleadings seeking to raise this issue in the future.”). On March 5, 2008, this court issued an order to show cause why Hogan should not be prohibited from filing any appea…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Antoine L. McBRIDE, 848 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 2003)
- Knox v. State, 873 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)