Eneias v. State

696 So. 2d 1365, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8498, 1997 WL 414293
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 25, 1997·No. No. 97-1192·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Eneias appeals from a summary denial of his second motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, challenging his 1992 conviction for unlawful possession of a controlled substance. First he argues that his plea of guilty was involuntary because he was not informed he might be deported. Secondly he argues that his counsel was ineffective in misadvising him regarding the consequences of his plea.

The first claim is identical to the one raised in his first rule 3.850 motion filed with this court.1 Thus, it is barred as successive. See Stroble v. State, 689 So.2d 1089 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Henry v. State, 679 So.2d 885 (Fla. 5th DCA), rev. denied, 686 So.2d 578 (Fla.1996).The ineffective assistance of counsel claim could or should have been raised in the first rule 3.850 proceeding. Thus it too is improper and successive. Jones v. State, 591 So.2d 911 (Fla.1991); Scott v. State, 656 So.2d 204 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).

AFFIRMED.

W. SHARP, GOSHORN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Footnotes

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

Eneias v. State, 696 So. 2d 1365, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 8498, 1997 WL 414293 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

696 So. 2d 1365 (Eneias v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Witherspoon v. State
710 So. 2d 143 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Cooper v. State
703 So. 2d 1248 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)