Hencile Dorsey v. State of Florida

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed April 15, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D25-1325 Lower Tribunal No. F19-13538 ________________

Hencile Dorsey, Appellant,

vs.

State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Miguel de la O, Judge.

Hencile Dorsey, in proper person.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Kayla Heather McNab, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before FERNANDEZ, MILLER, and GOODEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Muhammad v. State, 603 So. 2d 488, 489 (Fla. 1992)

(“Issues which either were or could have been litigated at trial and upon direct

appeal are not cognizable through collateral attack.”); see also Concepcion

v. State, 944 So. 2d 1069, 1072 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (“We recognize that

incarcerated persons must be provided with a full panoply of procedural

vehicles with which to challenge the lawfulness of their incarceration. On the

other hand, successive motions which have been heard, considered,

rejected, and then raised again, are an abuse of process.” (internal citations

omitted)); Gardner v. State, 550 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)

(“[A]ppellant’s speedy trial argument could and should have been raised on

direct appeal and consequently, was improperly raised pursuant to Rule

3.850.”).