Contreras v. State

Full title: Raul CONTRERAS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Aug 31, 2005

909 So. 2d 962 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

Opinion

No. 3D05-1720.

August 31, 2005.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Julio Jimenez, Judge.

Raul Contreras, in proper person.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, for appellee.

Before WELLS, and CORTIÑAS, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

WELLS, Judge.

Raul Contreras appeals from an order denying his Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence claiming that the habitualization notice provided to him was not sufficiently specific. A notice deficiency of this nature does not, however, render a sentence "illegal" under Rule 3.800(a) and must therefore be raised in a motion for post-conviction relief under Rule 3.850. See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Under Rule 3.850, the instant claim is time-barred.

Affirmed.