Fussell v. State

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date filed: 2002-10-16
Citations: 828 So. 2d 441, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15096, 2002 WL 31306588
Copy Citations
Click to Find Citing Cases
Lead Opinion
PER CURIAM.

Joe Fussell challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm.

In his motion, Fussell alleged that his plea was involuntary because defense counsel affirmatively misadvised him regarding the future senteneing-enhancing effects of the plea in regard to an as yet uncommitted crime. In Stansel v. State, 825 So.2d 1007 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002), we held that this claim is not cognizable in a rule 3.850 motion. We certify the same question that we certified in Stansel. We

Page 442
affirm, without discussion, any other issues raised by Fussell in his motion.

ALTENBERND, WHATLEY, and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur.