Legal Opinion

Bunch v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 13, 1995No. 94-2461PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

AFFIRMED. We affirm the summary denial of Bunch’s 3.800(a) motion for post-conviction relief without prejudice. Although Bunch has demonstrated a prima facie case of improper consecutive habitual offender sentences under 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 Callaway v. State, 642 So.2d 636 (Fla.2d DCA 1994); Borders v. State, 643 So.2d 110 (Fla.2d DCA 1994); Massey v. State, 648 So.2d 785 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994).

DAUKSCH, DIAMANTIS and THOMPSON, JJ.,…

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 by1 opinion

  1. Gentry v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995

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

Powered by the Exa API