Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

828 So. 2d 440

Lee v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided October 16, 2002

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2002-10-16

Relies on Stansel v. State

Decided 2002-10-16

PER CURIAM.

¶1Roy Lee challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm.

¶2In his motion, Lee alleged that his plea was involuntary because defense counsel affirmatively misadvised him regarding the future sentencing-enhancing effects of the plea in regard to an as yet uncommitted crime. In Stansel v. State, 825 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), we held that this claim is not cognizable in a rule 3.850 motion. We certify the same question that we certified in Stansel. We affirm, without dis*441cussion, any other issues raised by Lee in his motion.

ALTENBERND, WHATLEY, and NORTHCUTT, JJ„ concur.
/828/so2d/440 · .json · Public domain