Huipio v. State

Full title: Victorio HUIPIO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Date published: Jun 27, 2012

91 So. 3d 248 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

Opinion

No. 4D11–1157.

2012-06-27

Victorio HUIPIO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Martin J. Bidwill, Judge; L.T. Case No. 97–19655 CF10A. Victorio Huipio, Clermont, pro se. No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Martin J. Bidwill, Judge; L.T. Case No. 97–19655 CF10A.
Victorio Huipio, Clermont, pro se. No appearance required for appellee.
PER CURIAM.

Victorio Huipio appeals the trial court's summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief. He raised two grounds for relief in his motion: (1) the trial court could not impose an upward departure sentence on different grounds after his habitual offender sentence was stricken pursuant to Lamont v. State, 610 So.2d 435 (Fla.1992), and (2) it was error for a substitute judge to conduct resentencing. The first ground lacks merit. See Cook v. State, 866 So.2d 1291 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). Regarding the second ground, the record reflects the substitute judge complied with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.700(c)(1).

Affirmed.

HAZOURI, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.