Madera v. State
Madera v. State
226 So. 3d 385; 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 13393; 2017 WL 4182947
(Southern Reporter, Third Series)
Madera v. State
Opinion of the Court
We affirm Appellant’s convictions and sentences but do so without prejudice to Appellant filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) or 3.850 on his claim that the imposition of drug offender probation in this case is illegal. Appellant failed to preserve this claim for review on direct appeal by either contemporaneously objecting to the alleged sentencing error or by filing a motion pursuant to rule 3.800(b)(2). See Jackson v. State, 983 So.2d 562, 569 (Fla. 2008).
AFFIRMED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.