Cooper v. State, 817 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). · Go Syfert
Search
Cooper v. State, 817 So. 2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
34 citation events (34 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Pacheco v. State (fladistctapp, 2012-05-09)
Treatment trajectory · 2002 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2002 2014 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 19 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" Pacheco v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2012 · signal: accord · confidence high
Butts v. State, 898 So.2d 1082 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (holding Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) is the improper vehicle for attacking the sufficiency of a notice of intent to seek enhanced sentence); accord Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
cited Cited "see" McKnight v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
cited Cited "see" McKnight v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2009 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
cited Cited "see" Adams v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
cited Cited "see" Contreras v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
cited Cited "see" Cobb v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934, 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
cited Cited "see" Mays v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Washington v. State, 895 So.2d 1141 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).
cited Cited "see" Mumford v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
cited Cited "see" Butts v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
discussed Cited "see" Sinclair v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that a claim that a notice of intent to habitualize is not sufficiently specific must be raised in a Rule 3.850 motion).
discussed Cited "see" Jefferson v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that a claim that a notice of intent to habitualize is not sufficiently specific must be raised in a Rule 3.850 motion).
discussed Cited "see" Peoples v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that a claim that a notice of intent to habitualize is not sufficiently specific must be raised in a.Rule 3.850 motion).
discussed Cited "see" Martin v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that a claim that a notice of intent to habitualize is not sufficiently specific must be raised in a Rule 3.850 motion).
cited Cited "see" Ortiz v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
discussed Cited "see" Passmore v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that a claim that a notice of intent to habitualize is not sufficiently specific must be raised in a Rule 3.850 motion).
discussed Cited "see" Reed v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that a claim that a notice of intent to habitualize is not sufficiently specific must be raised in a Rule 3.850 motion).
discussed Cited "see" Hankin v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (holding that a claim that a notice of intent to habitualize is not sufficiently specific must be raised in a Rule 3.850 motion).
cited Cited "see" Cichoski v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2004 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seabrooks v. State, 817 So.2d 934, 935 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
cited Cited "see" Schmidt v. State
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · signal: see · confidence high
See Seabrooks v. State, 817 So.2d 934 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Terrance COOPER, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
3D02-825.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
May 15, 2002.
817 So. 2d 934
Cope, Fletcher and Shevin.
Cited by 29 opinions  |  Published

Terrance Cooper, in proper person.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, FLETCHER and SHEVIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Terrance Cooper appeals an order denying his motion to correct illegal sentence. First, defendant-appellant Cooper claims that the habitualization notice filed in his case was not sufficiently specific in indicating what portion of the habitual offender statute the State intended to pursue. A notice deficiency of this type does not render a sentence "illegal," for purposes of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Such a claim must be raised by motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Brown v. State, 813 So.2d 132 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). Under Rule 3.850, this claim is time-barred.

Assuming for purposes of discussion that there were no procedural bar, the claim is in any event without merit. See Sampson v. State, 798 So.2d 824 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001).

Affirmed.