Moore v. State
Moore v. State
969 So. 2d 1143; 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 18117; 2007 WL 3355590
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Moore v. State
Opinion of the Court
Appellant alleged in his rule 3.800(a) motion that his two consecutive sentences are illegal because the convictions for burglary of a dwelling and grand theft arose from the same criminal episode. We reverse because the order denying his motion states no reasons for the denial and there are no records attached which would refute the claim.
Reversed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.