Curtis v. Chiles

594 So. 2d 858, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1873, 1992 WL 37154
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 2, 1992·No. No. 91-1561·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s denial of the petition for writ of habeas corpus, because the grounds for relief asserted in the petition should have been presented to the trial court in a timely filed motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See State v. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District, 569 So.2d 439 (Fla.1990); Mack v. State, 586 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Hickman v. State, 581 So.2d 942 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Washington v. State, 576 So.2d 973 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).

WIGGINTON, BARFIELD and WOLF, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Curtis v. Chiles, 594 So. 2d 858, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 1873, 1992 WL 37154 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

594 So. 2d 858 (Curtis v. Chiles) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Dist. Ct. of Appeal, First Dist.
569 So. 2d 439 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)
Hickman v. State
581 So. 2d 942 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
MacK v. State
586 So. 2d 1266 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Washington v. State
576 So. 2d 973 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)