Baker v. State
Baker v. State
Opinion of the Court
Nevin Baker appeals the denial of his legally sufficient motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the denial of Grounds One, Three,
AFFRIMED in part,-REVERSED-in part, and REMANDED.'
. See Shere v. State, 742 So.2d 215, 217 n. 6 (Fla. 1999) (recognizing that an issue raised in a brief without argument is insufficiently presented for review).
. The trial court’s position that Ground Two lacks merit because the prior battery conviction was an element of the offense does not account for Baker’s stipulation to the prior battery conviction. See State v. Harbaugh, 754 So.2d 691, 694 (Fla. 2000) (“[T]he State and the trial court should accept a defendant’s stipulation to [prior convictions]. As in Brown, where a defendant stipulates to the [prior convictions], the State’s burden of proof for that element is satisfied.”); Brown v. State, 719 So.2d 882, 889 (Fla. 1998) ("[W]hen requested by a defendant in a felon-in-possession of a firearm case, the trial court must approve a stipulation whereby the parties acknowledge that the defendant is, without further elaboration, a prior convicted felon. At the same time, the State may place into the record, at its discretion, the actual judgments) and sentence(s) of the prior felony conviction(s). Of course, neither these documents nor the number and nature of the prior convictions should be disclosed to the trial jury.”); see also State v. Rodriguez, 575 So.2d 1262, 1266 (Fla. 1991).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.