Acosta v. State

WELLS, Chief Judge.

Jesus Acosta appeals from an order denying in part and granting in part his motion to correct illegal sentence under Floi’ida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. Acosta raises three claims in his motion. First, he claims that his sentence was illegal because the sentences imposed on his convictions for counts 2, 3, and 4 of the charges against him were a prohibited general sentence. We affirm that portion of the order rejecting this argument (an argument subsequently abandoned by Acosta) because separate sentences were entered on these counts.

Second, Acosta claimed below that…