White v. State, 3D06-259.
| Decision Date | 28 June 2006 |
| Docket Number | No. 3D06-259.,3D06-259. |
| Citation | 935 So.2d 554 |
| Parties | Daniel Victor WHITE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Daniel Victor White, in proper person.
Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, for appellee.
Before GERSTEN, SUAREZ, and ROTHENBERG, JJ.
The defendant, Daniel Victor White, appeals from the denial of two of the three claims raised in his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We affirm.
Pursuant to a negotiated plea with the State, the defendant pled guilty to numerous charges in five cases (97-27541, 97-34847, 97-34344, 97-33536, and 97-33538), and agreed to be sentenced as an habitual offender. In his motion to correct illegal sentence, the defendant raised three claims. Based upon the State's confession of error regarding the defendant's second claim, the trial court granted the motion and vacated the defendant's sentence in Case No. 97-34344. The remaining two claims are the subject of this appeal.
That the defendant's plea to an occupied burglary in Case No. 97-34344 was not free and voluntary because the State failed to establish a factual basis for the plea
Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172(a) provides that The defendant claims that the trial court erred in summarily denying his first claim as the record reflects that the State failed to provide a factual basis for the defendant's plea to burglary of an occupied structure. As this claim is not cognizable under rule 3.800(a), we conclude that the trial court properly denied the claim. See Nowlin v. State, 639 So.2d 1050, 1051 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)( that whether the trial court established that there was a factual basis for the defendant's guilty plea, is not an issue which may be raised in a rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence)(citing Young v. State, 616 So.2d 1133 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)). Such a claim may, however, be addressed in a postconviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, unless it is time-barred. Nowlin, 639 So.2d at 1052. However, since the defendant entered his plea of guilty and was sentenced on June 4, 1999, even if we were to treat the defendant's motion as a motion filed under Rule 3.850, we would affirm as such a motion would clearly be untimely. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b)( ). Therefore, the trial court properly denied the defendant's first claim.
That the defendant's sentences as an habitual offender are illegal
The...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rowlie v. State
...2d DCA 2002); Mosely v. State, 688 So.2d 999 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Desmond v. State, 576 So.2d 743 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); White v. State, 935 So.2d 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Mills v. State, 840 So.2d 464 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Foss v. State, 834 So.2d 404 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); McMillan v. State, 832 ......
-
Santiago v. State
...576 So.2d 743 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Roker v. State, 25 So.3d 647 (Fla. 4th DCA), review denied,39 So.3d 1265 (Fla.2010); White v. State, 935 So.2d 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Francois v. State, 934 So.2d 536 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Robinson v. State, 925 So.2d 373 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Brown v. State,......
-
Davis v. State, 2D13–3745.
...2d DCA 2006); Shortridge v. State, 884 So.2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); O'Brien v. State, 80 So.3d 459 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); White v. State, 935 So.2d 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Labadie v. State, 840 So.2d 332 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); Harris v. State, 789 So.2d 1114 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).KHOUZAM, CRENSH......
-
Rogers v. State
...321 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Nedd v. State, 855 So.2d 664 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); Vidak v. State, 793 So.2d 27 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); White v. State, 935 So.2d 554 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Paul v. State, 830 So.2d 953 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).NORTHCUTT, LaROSE, and KHOUZAM, JJ.,...