Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

159 So. 3d 869

Disanto v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 13, 2015

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2015-02-13

Relies on Spears v. State

Decided 2015-02-13

PER CURIAM.

¶1Seth Disanto appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence, which was filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). In his motion, Disanto alleged that the State improperly relied on a Her-nando County conviction as one of the predicate felonies necessary to support his habitualization in this case. However, because Disanto did not allege that the predicate prior convictions used to support his habitualization do not exist as a matter of law, his motion is facially insufficient. See Macaluso v. State, 912 So.2d 694, 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order summarily denying Disanto’s motion and remand with instructions to enter an order of dismissal.

¶2REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.

PALMER, EVANDER, and BERGER, JJ., concur.
/159/so3d/869 · .json · Public domain