Hopping v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
JOANOS, Judge.
This is an appeal from the denial of appellant’s rule 3.800 motion for post-conviction relief. One of the issues raised in the motion was whether appellant’s 1992 resentencing, which increased his sentence in response to his 1992 rule 3.800 motion for post-conviction relief, but did not exceed the statutory maximum, is an illegal sentence. We requested a response from the State on this issue, specifically on the effect of Troupe v. Rowe, 283 So.2d 857 (Fla.1973) (prohibiting increasing a legal sentence once it has commenced on double jeopardy grounds).
Citing the narrow…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Davis v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1995
- State v. CallawaySupreme Court of Florida · 1995
- Troupe v. RoweSupreme Court of Florida · 1973
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Florida · 1986
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Blakley v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1999
- Hopping v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1998
- Skidmore v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997