Hopkins v. State
884 So. 2d 1073, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 15123, 2004 WL 2309033
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Hopkins v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 15126 →
Opinion
Clifford Hopkins appeals the order of the trial court summarily denying his Rule 3.850 motion. We affirm for two reasons. First, his Rule 8.850 motion concerning his criminal case that became final in 1996, is untimely. Second, his motion is successive. This court addressed the same essential issue raised here in its opinion growing out of an appeal from an order denying an earlier Rule 3.850 motion. See Hopkins v. State, 743 So.2d 171 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hopkins v. State, 884 So. 2d 1073, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 15123, 2004 WL 2309033 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).
884 So. 2d 1073 (Hopkins v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hopkins v. State
743 So. 2d 171 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)