From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sampson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Apr 25, 2001
794 So. 2d 631 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Opinion

No. 2D00-2243.

Opinion filed April 25, 2001.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Jack Espinosa, Jr., Judge.


BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

Appellant's motion for rehearing is granted. The opinion dated January 26, 2001, is withdrawn, and the attached opinion is substituted therefor.


Thearon Sampson appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Sampson alleges that his plea was involuntary because the trial court did not adequately advise him of the consequences of habitualization. Sampson's claim, although not refuted by the record attachments, is facially insufficient. See Newsome v. State, 704 So.2d 213 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). We therefore affirm the trial court's order without prejudice to Sampson's right to file a facially sufficient rule 3.850 motion. We affirm the denial of Sampson's remaining claim without comment.

Threadgill, A.C.J., and Fulmer and Green, JJ., Concur.


Summaries of

Sampson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Apr 25, 2001
794 So. 2d 631 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
Case details for

Sampson v. State

Case Details

Full title:THEARON SAMPSON, a/k/a RON SAMPSON, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Apr 25, 2001

Citations

794 So. 2d 631 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Citing Cases

Harris v. State

We therefore affirm without prejudice to any right Harris might have to file a facially sufficient claim in…