Skip to main content

Fortner v. State

Citations

  • 23 So. 3d 1275
  • 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 5
  • 2010 WL 21176

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • stating that a claim that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to file a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct a sentence that is not authorized by law is cognizable in a petition filed under rule 9.141(d)
  • stating that a claim that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to file a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct a sentence that is not authorized by law is cognizable in a petition filed under rule 9.141(d)
  • stating that a claim that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to file a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct a sentence that is not authorized by law is cognizable in a petition filed under rule 9.141(c)
  • “A claim that counsel was ineffective in failing to file a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct sentencing error ... is cognizable in a petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.”
  • “A claim that counsel was ineffective in failing to file a rule 3.800(b)(2) motion to correct sentencing error when the sentence imposed is not authorized by law is cognizable in a petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Carolyn, Fulmer, Northcutt, Silberman

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.