Harvin v. State

385 So. 2d 119
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 26, 1980·No. No. 80-1606·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant seeks review of the summary denial of his motion under Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.850 to vacate the judgment and sentence entered against him after a guilty plea. The entry of the plea effectively waived his presently asserted claims that his confession to the crime was involuntary and that evidence against him was the product of an unlawful search and seizure; hence, these matters cannot be considered in a Rule 3.850 proceeding. E. g., Whitlow v. State, 256 So.2d 48 (Fla.2d DCA 1971); Hand v. State, 208 So.2d 307 (Fla.2d DCA 1968). Since there was no allegation that the plea itself was not knowingly and voluntarily entered, or was otherwise subject to legal challenge, the motion was properly denied without evidentiary hearing.

Affirmed.

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

Harvin v. State, 385 So. 2d 119 (Fla. Ct. App. 1980).

385 So. 2d 119 (Harvin v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

KEENYA YOUNG v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2020
Lucas v. State
438 So. 2d 440 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Rosemond v. State
433 So. 2d 635 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Cochran v. State
427 So. 2d 1125 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
State v. Dukes
388 So. 2d 651 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Van Fuquay v. State
386 So. 2d 1314 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)