Haywood v. State
This text of 615 So. 2d 707 (Haywood v. State) 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
The appellant contends that the court erred in denying his motion for postconviction relief as untimely filed. He argues that he had previously filed a motion for postconviction relief that was dismissed without prejudice by the trial court. Apparently, the motion on review here was the resubmission of that motion. If correct, the court erred in denying the motion as untimely filed. See Lemus v. State, 585 So.2d 388 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991). However, since the appellant’s postconviction relief motion fails on its merits, we affirm.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
615 So. 2d 707, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 12420, 1992 WL 368458, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/haywood-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.