Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2002

Riley v. State

Riley v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided October 16, 2002 · Parker, Stringer, Whatley
828 So. 2d 441; 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15100; 2002 WL 31306960 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Riley v. State

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Phillippian Henry Riley challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm.

In his motion, Riley alleged that his plea was involuntary because defense counsel affirmatively misadvised him regarding the future senteneing-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 discussion, any other issues raised by Riley in his motion.

PARKER, WHATLEY, and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.

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