Legal Opinion

Peeples v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 1, 1991No. 91-00195PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

Maxel Peeples appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief. We affirm.

Easiest to resolve are the several claims regarding the legality of Peeples’s sentence. The record refutes his allegation that one or more minimum mandatory sentences were imposed without statutory authority. Although one unauthorized mandatory term was included in the original judgment and sentence, that error was corrected on direct appeal and by the actions of the trial court after mandate. Peeples v. State, 562 So.2d 863 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Second, a guideline scoresheet error is shown to be…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Palmer v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1983
  3. Gibbons v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  4. Peeples v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Hayward v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
  2. Ruland v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993
  3. Cowan v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API