Bentley v. State

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT HOWARD E. BENTLEY, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________ ) Case No. 2D12-5556 Opinion filed December 13, 2013. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Richard A. Luce, Judge. Howard E. Bentley, pro se. CASANUEVA, Judge. We affirm the postconviction court's summary denial of Howard E. Bentley's motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) without prejudice for Bentley to refile his motion to state a facially sufficient claim. Such a claim would specifically identify the portions of the record that demonstrate, on their face, his entitlement to relief. See Johnson v. State, 60 So. 3d 1045, 1051 (Fla. 2011). Such a motion shall not be considered successive. Affirmed. VILLANTI and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

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.