DAVID ROHALIA SAMPSON vs STATE OF FLORIDA

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 DAVID ROHALIA SAMPSON, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ___________________________________) Case No. 2D19-326 Opinion filed May 20, 2020. Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; Frank Quesada and Joseph A. Bulone, Judges. Deana K. Marshall of Law Office of Deana K. Marshall, P.A., Riverview, for Appellant. PER CURIAM. We affirm without discussion the postconviction court's order denying David Rohalia Sampson's motion for postconviction relief, which he filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Our affirmance is without prejudice to any right Mr. Sampson may have to seek review under rule 3.800(a) of the sentencing issue that he first raised in his motion for rehearing of the order summarily denying his rule 3.850 motion. NORTHCUTT, SALARIO, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur. - 2 -

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.