From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Arce v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jul 5, 2006
936 So. 2d 651 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

Opinion

No. 4D05-3947.

July 5, 2006.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Edward A. Garrison, Judge

Jose M. Arce, Crawfordville, pro se.

Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Claudine M. LaFrance, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


Jose M. Arce appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). We reverse and remand with respect to one of his three claims.

Arce alleged that one of the predicate offenses used to qualify him for habitual offender sentencing was not his conviction. Arce's claim is cognizable in a rule 3.800(a) motion if the error can be determined from the record. See Bover v. State, 797 So.2d 1246 (Fla. 2001). Our record does not contain documents to refute this legally sufficient claim. Sheffield v. State, 903 So.2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for further review of this point.

FARMER, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Arce v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jul 5, 2006
936 So. 2d 651 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
Case details for

Arce v. State

Case Details

Full title:Jose M. ARCE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jul 5, 2006

Citations

936 So. 2d 651 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

Citing Cases

Arce v. State

Two additional opportunities have been afforded to refute that claim or to otherwise demonstrate that Arce…

Arce v. State

Arce is challenging the predicate offenses used to support his habitual offender sentence. We reversed the…