Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2010

Chacon v. State

Chacon v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided February 17, 2010 · Ramirez, Cope, Salter
28 So. 3d 941; 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 1587; 2010 WL 532818 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)

Chacon v. State

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

Concurring Opinion

COPE, J.,

(concurring).

I concur in affirming the denial of the appellant’s motion to correct illegal sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) because the issue the appellant raises on appeal is completely different from the issue the appellant raised in his motion dated September 3, 2009. The trial court erred in denying the motion as being “successive,” because as the Florida Supreme Court has explained, there is no “successiveness” bar in rule 3.800(a). State v. McBride, 848 So.2d 287, 290 (Fla. 2003). Instead, the question is whether the same claim has previously been raised and decided. Id. The trial court’s erroneous statement *942about “successiveness” is, however, harmless under the circumstances of this case.

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