From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Seabrooks v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
May 15, 2002
817 So. 2d 934 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Opinion

No. 4D02-1189.

May 15, 2002.

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800(a) motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Dale Ross, Judge; L.T. Case No. 90-7024 CF10.

Miller Seabrooks, Punta Gorda, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.


Appellant filed a motion to enforce a plea agreement after being sentenced for violating his probation. In it, he alleged that the trial court had ordered that he receive credit for gain time earned during his prior prison term. However, the Department of Corrections forfeited that credit. Appellant claims he is entitled to either the credit or resentencing in a manner that effectuates the intent of the court's order. He cites Wallace v. State, 793 So.2d 78, 79 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), as authority for the trial court to consider a "motion to enforce a plea agreement." While we acknowledge that the second district authorized the trial court to consider such a motion, under the Rules of Criminal Procedure, the only avenue available to appellant is rule 3.850. See Gadley v. State, 781 So.2d 488 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Jenkins v. State, 625 So.2d 88 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). We therefore affirm without prejudice to appellant filing a proper rule 3,850 motion within thirty days of the date of this opinion.

GUNTHER, WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Seabrooks v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
May 15, 2002
817 So. 2d 934 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
Case details for

Seabrooks v. State

Case Details

Full title:MILLER SEABROOKS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: May 15, 2002

Citations

817 So. 2d 934 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Citing Cases

Schmidt v. State

We affirm without prejudice to permit appellant to file a rule 3.850 motion within 30 days. See Seabrooks v.…

Dellofano v. State

Therefore, the only avenue available for an appellant to pursue his or her postconviction claim below is a…