From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Maddox v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
May 17, 1996
673 So. 2d 198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

No. 96-721.

May 17, 1996.

3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County; R. Michael Hutcheson, Judge.

Aldric D. Maddox, Bowling Green, pro se.

No appearance for Appellee.


Aldric D. Maddox appeals an order denying his Rule 3.800 (a) motion to correct an illegal sentence. Maddox's motion alleges that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to properly advise Maddox before he entered his guilty plea.

Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are not cognizable in a Rule 3.800 proceeding. See, e.g., Wiley v. State, 632 So.2d 721 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Additionally, construing Maddox's motion as a Rule 3.850 motion would not be helpful since the motion would be denied as successive and an abuse of procedure.

AFFIRMED.

PETERSON, C.J., and DAUKSCH and ANTOON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Maddox v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
May 17, 1996
673 So. 2d 198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

Maddox v. State

Case Details

Full title:ALDRIC D. MADDOX, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: May 17, 1996

Citations

673 So. 2d 198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Citing Cases

Ramos v. State

To the extent that the defendant suggests that his trial counsel was ineffective, such a claim cannot be…

Ferguson v. State

See Kuiken v. State, 127 So. 3d 629, 630 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (noting that claims of ineffective assistance of…