JEAN COTY RIDORE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 3, 2023
Docket22-2004
StatusPublished

This text of JEAN COTY RIDORE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA (JEAN COTY RIDORE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA) 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.

Bluebook
JEAN COTY RIDORE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, (Fla. Ct. App. 2023).

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed May 3, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-2004 Lower Tribunal No. F15-20650 ________________

Jean Coty Ridore, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Thomas J. Rebull, Judge.

Jean Coty Ridore, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Richard L. Polin, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SCALES, MILLER, and BOKOR, JJ.

MILLER, J. Appellant, Jean Coty Ridore, appeals the dismissal of his successive

motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal

Procedure 3.850. In the motion, appellant asserted a myriad of errors at the

trial level and alleged that his appellate attorney “opted to raise a single issue

that was not properly preserved for appellate review and the issue was not

made part of the evidence/record while [he or she] totally ignored the issues

that were properly preserved.” It is axiomatic that a motion for postconviction

relief is not a second appeal and cannot be used to litigate issues that could

have been raised on direct appeal or in prior postconviction proceedings.

Smith v. State, 445 So. 2d 323, 325 (Fla. 1983) (“Issues which either were

or could have been litigated at trial and upon direct appeal are not cognizable

through collateral attack.”); Everett v. State, 928 So. 2d 1241, 1242 (Fla. 3d

DCA 2006) (“A defendant seeking postconviction relief is procedurally barred

from raising claims that he could have raised and should have raised on

direct appeal.”). Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to any right

appellant may have to file a petition pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate

Procedure 9.141(c), alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Smith v. State
445 So. 2d 323 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1983)
Everett v. State
928 So. 2d 1241 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
JEAN COTY RIDORE v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jean-coty-ridore-v-the-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2023.