Barletta v. State

Full title: Paul BARLETTA, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Nov 10, 2004

886 So. 2d 322 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

Opinion

No. 4D04-469.

November 10, 2004.

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Cheryl J. Aleman, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 95-17139 CF10A, 95-18630 CF10A 01-9691 CF10A.

Paul Barletta, Florida City, pro se.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse the trial court's summary denial of appellant's motion for relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, and remand for an evidentiary hearing or attachment of those portions of the record which conclusively refute appellant's claimed entitlement to relief. In so doing, we reject the state's argument that our per curiam affirmance in Barletta v. State, 842 So.2d 124 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) bars appellant's claim that his sentence is an illegal habitual offender sentence under the collateral estoppel doctrine. See State v. McBride, 848 So.2d 287 (Fla. 2003); Shelton v. State, 739 So.2d 1235 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999).

POLEN, KLEIN and MAY, JJ., concur.