PERALTA v. STATE (2024)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jose PERALTA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D23-2168

Decided: March 13, 2024

Before LINDSEY, MILLER, and LOBREE, JJ.

Chase Law Florida, P.A., and Dane K. Chase (Saint Petersburg), for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Chief Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Affirmed. See Johnson v. State, 50 So. 3d 77, 78–79 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (affirming trial court's denial of rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence without prejudice to permit appellant to seek relief through proper and timely motion to withdraw the plea under rule 3.850); State v. Huerta, 38 So. 3d 883, 885 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (finding appeal was not cognizable under rule 3.800(a) motion to correct illegal sentence); see also Haynes v. State, 106 So. 3d 481, 482 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (“But while [appellant] sought relief under rule 3.800(a) to obtain correction of his sentence, he was actually challenging the terms of his plea agreement and the resulting convictions. As the sentence was the product of a negotiated plea, the remedy is not to correct the illegal sentence, but rather a motion under [rule] 3.850 to set aside the plea, vacate the judgment and sentence, and reinstitute all charges pending against [appellant] prior to entry of the plea.”) (internal citations omitted).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network