Legal Opinion

Moore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 21, 2012No. 4D11-3451Published

1Per curiam

The Defendant appeals an order summarily denying his rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence. We affirm.

Although the trial court failed to attach portions of the record to refute the facially sufficient allegations, the same ground for relief was raised and rejected on direct appeal, Moore v. State, 727 So.2d 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (Table). The law of the case precludes its reconsideration now. See State v. McBride, 848 So.2d 287, 290-91 (Fla.2003); Hastings v. Krischer, 840 So.2d 267, 272 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).

If we were to reach the merits, we would still affirm. See Terry v. State,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. State v. McBrideSupreme Court of Florida · 2003
  2. Terry v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2002
  3. Hastings v. KrischerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003

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

Powered by the Exa API