Harris v. State
Harris v. State
827 So. 2d 382; 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14551; 2002 WL 31251693
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Harris v. State
Opinion of the Court
Elisarmes Harris appeals an order denying his motion to correct illegal sentence. Assuming, without deciding, that the motion of defendant-appellant Harris is cognizable under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a), the record conclusively refutes it. The plea colloquy on page 6 specifically states, ‘You are now sentenced as a habitual offender.” As to defendant’s claim that he does not qualify as a habitual offender, the qualifying offenses were specifically read into the record of the same plea colloquy.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.