Lenard v. State (Per Curiam)
Annotate this CaseIn 2012, Appellant entered a negotiated plea of guilty to charges of felony theft of property and criminal mischief. In 2013, Appellant entered a negotiated guilty plea to violation of his probation and to failing to register as a sex offender. After Appellant filed a motion to correct clerical mistake and motion for credit for time spent in custody, an amended sentencing order was entered. Noting that the errors in the sentencing order had been corrected, the trial court denied the motions. Appellant subsequently filed a pro se petition to correct an illegal sentence, arguing that the amended sentencing order did not address the allegations raised in his motions denied by the trial court. The trial court denied the petition. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding that the trial court did not err in denying postconviction relief.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.