Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2013

Miller v. State

Miller v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided November 27, 2013 · Morris, Silberman, Wallace
130 So. 3d 713; 2013 WL 6283412; 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 19071 (Southern Reporter, Third Series)

Miller v. State

Opinion of the Court

WALLACE, Judge.

We affirm the postconviction court’s denial of Victor Miller’s motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) because Mr. Miller did not demonstrate where in the record it can be shown that he is entitled to relief. See Johnson v. State, 60 So.3d 1045, 1051 n. 2 (Fla. 2011). However, our affirmance is without prejudice for Mr. Miller to file a facially sufficient motion.

Although we affirm the denial of Mr. Miller’s motion, we note that constructive possession of a firearm cannot support the imposition of a minimum mandatory sentence enhancement under sections 775.087(1)-(2), Florida Statutes (2000). See Irons v. State, 851 So.2d 798, 798 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).

Affirmed without prejudice.

SILBERMAN and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.

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