Legal Opinion

Edwards v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 3, 1995No. 95-348PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMPSON, Judge.

AFFIRMED. We affirm the summary denial of Edwards’ 3.800(a)1 motion for post-conviction relief without prejudice. Although Edwards argues that the court imposed improper consecutive habitual offender sentences because they arose out of a single factual event, Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, — U.S. —, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994), the correct remedy to seek relief is a properly filed Rule 3.850 motion. See Massey v. State, 648 So.2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Borders v. State, 643 So.2d 110 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Callaway v. State, 642 So.2d 636 (Fla.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hale v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1993
  2. Callaway v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
  3. Massey v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994
  4. Borders v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1994

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Humana of Florida, Inc. v. McKaughanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
  2. Spires v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
  3. Jackson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API