Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2002

Estime v. State

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided September 25, 2002 · Farmer, Gunther, Taylor

826 So. 2d 524; 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 13978; 2002 WL 31115533 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Estime v. State (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed without prejudice to file a sworn, legally sufficient motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Peart v. State, 756 So.2d 42, 47 (Fla. 2000); Orduno v. State, 800 So.2d 669, 669 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)(“[Orduno] asserted that the trial court did not advise him of the deportation consequences of his plea as required under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172, that he did not know he could be deported if he pleaded no contest, and that he would not have entered the plea if he had known he could be deported. Orduno has stated a facially sufficient claim for relief’).

GUNTHER, FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.