¶1This is an appeal from an order denying a motion for post-conviction relief which claimed that insufficient reasons had been given by the sentencing judge for deviating from the sentencing guidelines. We affirm, not only because we find no error in the deviation, see State v. Baker, 483 So.2d 423 (Fla.1986) and Ballard v. State, 11 F.L.W. 1179 (Fla. 4th DCA May 21, 1986), but because we believe appellant, who appealed his conviction and sentence but was unsuccessful, had no right to subsequently challenge alleged sentencing errors that could and should have been raised on appeal. Richardson v. State, 491 So.2d 1242 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986).
493 So. 2d 79
493 So.2d 79
11 Fla.L.Weekly 1864
Efraimson v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided August 27, 1986
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1986-08-27
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently February 1987
1 state decisions
Relies on 483 So. 2d 423 - State v. Baker · 491 So. 2d 1242 - Richardson v. State
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1986-08-27
View the full empirical analysis of this case →