Joseph v. State

107 So. 3d 492, 2013 WL 512973, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2248
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 13, 2013·No. No. 4D12-2748·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the denial of appellant’s motion for postconviction relief. First, Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), does not apply retroactively to the 1999 plea. Hernandez v. State, — So.3d - (Fla.2012). Second, appellant does not show that he was present in the country lawfully. Padilla applies only to those who were present in the country lawfully at the time of the plea. Appellant cannot show that the plea is the sole basis for his removability. See Rosas v. State, 991 So.2d 1003 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).

Affirmed.

WARNER, TAYLOR and CONNER, JJ., concur.

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

Joseph v. State, 107 So. 3d 492, 2013 WL 512973, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 2248 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

107 So. 3d 492 (Joseph v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Angela Rosario v. State
165 So. 3d 672 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)
Juan Alberto Blanco Garcia v. State of Tennessee
425 S.W.3d 248 (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2013)
Sinclair v. State
127 So. 3d 838 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)
Cano v. State
112 So. 3d 646 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)
Garay v. State
125 So. 3d 874 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)
Ibarra v. State
125 So. 3d 820 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)