From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stoutamire v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 20, 1998
710 So. 2d 744 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

Opinion

No. 97-1075

Opinion filed May 20, 1998.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County.

Thomas J. Kennon, Jr., Judge.

Appellant, Pro Se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General and Trisha Meggs, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


The trial court correctly denied appellant's 3.800(a) motion because it did not allege an illegal sentence. Appellant's motion would have been timely filed under rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, and might have been considered as such by the trial court had the notary's certificate reflected that he took an oath that substantially complied with Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.987, see Zipperer v. Singletary, 693 So.2d 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Hall v. State, 643 So.2d 635 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (on rehearing). Since it does not substantially comply, we must affirm; however, our affirmance is without prejudice to file a properly sworn rule 3.850 motion before the time expires to do so.

AFFIRMED.

JOANOS and WOLF, JJ., and SMITH, LARRY G., SENIOR JUDGE, CONCUR.


Summaries of

Stoutamire v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
May 20, 1998
710 So. 2d 744 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
Case details for

Stoutamire v. State

Case Details

Full title:JOHN W. STOUTAMIRE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: May 20, 1998

Citations

710 So. 2d 744 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

Citing Cases

Stoutamire v. State

On appeal, a different panel of this court affirmed, concluding that the motion "did not allege an illegal…

Myers v. State

Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to the appellant's timely refiling a proper motion. See, e.g.,…