DINO MARCUS GARCIA v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA
This text of DINO MARCUS GARCIA v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA (DINO MARCUS GARCIA v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed January 12, 2022. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-2144 Lower Tribunal No. F91-9932A ________________
Dino Marcus Garcia, Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Alberto Milian, Judge.
Ana M. Davide, P.A., and Ana M. Davide, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee.
Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and EMAS and BOKOR, JJ.
PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Dino Marcus Garcia v. State, 145 So. 3d 846 (Fla. 3d
DCA 2014) (affirming trial court order denying postconviction relief motion
raising the same grounds raised in the instant appeal). See also McCrae v.
State, 437 So. 2d 1388, 1390 (Fla. 1983) (reaffirming that a motion under
Rule 3.850 may “be summarily denied when it is based on grounds that have
been raised in prior post-conviction motions under the rule and have been
decided adversely to the movant on their merits. A ‘second or successive
motion for similar relief,’ as used in Rule 3.850 has thus been interpreted to
mean a motion stating substantially the same grounds as a previous motion
attacking the same conviction or sentence under the Rule.”) (internal
citations omitted); Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(h)(2) (providing in pertinent part: “A
second or successive motion is an extraordinary pleading. Accordingly, a
court may dismiss a second or successive motion if the court finds that it fails
to allege new or different grounds for relief and the prior determination was
on the merits or, if new and different grounds are alleged, the judge finds
that the failure of the defendant or the attorney to assert those grounds in a
prior motion constituted an abuse of the procedure or there was no good
cause for the failure of the defendant or defendant's counsel to have
asserted those grounds in a prior motion.”)
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
DINO MARCUS GARCIA v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dino-marcus-garcia-v-the-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2022.