From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Penrod v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jul 2, 1993
621 So. 2d 473 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Opinion

No. 93-683.

May 18, 1993. On Motion for Rehearing July 2, 1993.

3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County; John Dean Moxley, Jr., Judge.

Arthur Raymond Penrod, pro se.

No appearance for appellee.


AFFIRMED.

DAUKSCH, HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur.


ON MOTION FOR REHEARING


Appellant has sought a rehearing because the trial court improperly relied on out-of-state convictions to habitualize him under section 775.084, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1988). Because appellant failed to raise this argument before the trial court in his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion to correct sentence, his motion for rehearing is denied without prejudice to his raising this ground for relief in another 3.800(a) motion below. See Johnson v. State, 616 So.2d 1 (Fla.), revised, 18 Fla. L. Weekly S234 (Fla. April 8, 1993).

DENIED.

HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Penrod v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jul 2, 1993
621 So. 2d 473 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Case details for

Penrod v. State

Case Details

Full title:ARTHUR RAYMOND PENROD, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Jul 2, 1993

Citations

621 So. 2d 473 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing Cases

Holmes v. State

Affirmance is without prejudice for appellant to raise these claims by proper motion in the trial court. See…