From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Moore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Mar 27, 2002
810 So. 2d 976 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Opinion

No. 4D01-4064.

February 6, 2002. Rehearing Denied March 27, 2002.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; James I. Cohn, Judge.

Charles K. Moore, Blountstown, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.


We affirm the denial of appellant's motion to correct illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). His claim that the state did not give him notice if its intent to seek a habitual offender sentence is not reviewable through rule 3.800(a). See Hollis v. State, 763 So.2d 1155 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); Hope v. State, 766 So.2d 343 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). His second claim — that he could not be given a habitual offender sentence upon violation of probation because the original sentence was not a habitual offender sentence — was raised by appellant in his direct appeal and in three more appeals filed in this court. As we did in each of those prior cases, we again find this argument to be without merit and affirm the order denying his latest motion. Also, consistent with Rivera v. State, 728 So.2d 1165, 1166 (Fla. 1998), and Prince v. State, 719 So.2d 346 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), we hereby prohibit appellant from any future filings concerning this second claim. We also caution appellant that if he violates this prohibition, he will face additional sanctions.

TAYLOR, HAZOURI, and MAY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Moore v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Mar 27, 2002
810 So. 2d 976 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
Case details for

Moore v. State

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES K. MOORE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Mar 27, 2002

Citations

810 So. 2d 976 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Citing Cases

Perry v. State

Affirmed without prejudice to seek review in a legally sufficient, timely motion for post-conviction relief…

Epps v. State

Affirmed. A defective notice of intent to habitualize is a procedural error which does not result in an…