Curtis Jones v. State of Florida
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2005 CURTIS JONES, FARMER, C.J., POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur. Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. CASE NO. 4D05-119 Opinion filed February 16, 2005 Appeal of order denying rule 3.800(a) motion from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Dwight L. Geiger, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562000CF000045A. Curtis J. Jones, Bushnell, pro se. No appearance required for appellee. PER CURIAM. The order denying as successive appellant s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) motion is affirmed. Although we find the motion was not successive and barred by collateral estoppel, the motion failed to state a legally sufficient claim under rule 3.800(a). Accordingly, affirmance is without prejudice for appellant to again seek relief in the trial court through a rule 3.800(a) motion that specifically identifies non-hearsay, record evidence supporting the claim of a violation of Hale v. State , 630 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1993). See Burgess v. State , 831 So.2d 137 (Fla. 2002); Brown v. State , 806 So.2d 627 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Nelson v. State , 855 So.2d 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Speas v. State, 887 So.2d 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004). NOT FINAL UNTIL DISPOSITION OF ANY TIMELY FILED MOTION FOR REHEARING.
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.
