Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

885 So. 2d 911

Docket No. 5D04-2736.

Cook v. State

Richard Wayne COOK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided September 24, 2004.

Rehearing Denied November 4, 2004.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2004-09-24

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently December 2010

4 state decisions

Relies on 869 So. 2d 533 - Lofton v. State · 799 So. 2d 208 - Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Barnard · Global Trading Agency, Inc. v. City National Bank Corp.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2004-09-24

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Richard Wayne Cook, Jasper, Pro Se.

¶2No Appearance for Appellee.

¶3ORFINGER, J.

¶4Richard Wayne Cook appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). In 1999, Cook pled no contest to carrying a concealed weapon by a convicted felon, battery, and improper exhibition of a dangerous weapon, and was sentenced to an extended term in prison as an habitual felony offender. In his Rule 3.800(a) motion, Cook contends that his sentence is illegal because the razor knife used in the crimes does not fall within the statutory definition of a weapon, because of the length of the blade.

¶5The trial court denied Cook's motion, finding that the error raised is not apparent on the face of the record, and, therefore, is not cognizable in a Rule 3.800(a) motion. We agree. Cook is challenging his convictions, not his sentences, and such a claim cannot be asserted in a Rule 3.800(a) motion. See e.g., State v. Williams, 854 So.2d 215 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003), review denied, 869 So.2d 541 (Fla.2004); State v. Moten, 698 So.2d 1345 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), review dismissed, 799 So.2d 218 (Fla.2001).

¶6Finding no error in the trial court's order, we affirm.

¶7AFFIRMED.

¶8SHARP, W. and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

/885/so2d/911 · .json · Public domain