Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

761 So. 2d 1139

Burnsed v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2000-04-07

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently July 2000

1 state decisions

Relies on 626 So. 2d 1364 - Gartrell v. State · Price v. State · Burns v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2000-04-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Gerald Plesant Burnsed, Jr., appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). The trial court denied the motion as being successive and an abuse of procedure. Because rule 3.800 contains no proscription against successive motions, a motion brought pursuant to that rule cannot be denied on this ground. See Burns v. State, 637 So.2d 937 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Price v. State, 692 So.2d 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Such an error would ordinarily require reversal. In the interest of judicial *1140economy, however, we reviewed Burnsed’s motion and determined that neither of his claims is cognizable in a proceeding pursuant to rule 3.800. See Gartrell v. State, 626 So.2d 1364 (Fla.1993). We, therefore, affirm the denial of his motion.

¶2Affirmed.

THREADGILL, A.C.J., and GREEN and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.
/761/so2d/1139 · .json · Public domain