From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Floyd v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jan 11, 2002
807 So. 2d 93 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Opinion

Case No. 5D01-3282

Opinion filed January 11, 2002 Rehearing Denied February 12, 2002.

3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Putnam County, A.W. Nichols, III, Judge.

Leroy Floyd, Indiantown, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.


Floyd appeals the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). He seeks to challenge his 1992 sentences for robbery and kidnapping on the ground he should not have received consecutive sentences because both crimes arose out of the same episode. This claim requires a factual determination in this case, and cannot be determined from the face of the record. Thus it is not cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion proceeding. See Carter v. State, 786 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 2001).

Floyd's additional claim that his life sentence for kidnapping was unauthorized because a sentence for a life felony cannot be enhanced under the habitual offender statute is without merit. His kidnapping conviction was a first degree felony, not a life felony. See § 787.01(2), Fla. Stat.

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON, CJ., and PLEUS, J., concur.


Summaries of

Floyd v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jan 11, 2002
807 So. 2d 93 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
Case details for

Floyd v. State

Case Details

Full title:LEROY FLOYD Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Jan 11, 2002

Citations

807 So. 2d 93 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Citing Cases

Wilkinson v. State

AFFIRMED. See Floyd v. State, 807 So.2d 93 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). PETERSON, PLEUS and MONACO, JJ.,…

Pope v. State

Pope was properly sentenced as an habitual offender because kidnapping is a first degree felony, not a life…