Levoyant v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Levoyant v. State

561 So. 2d 343, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2657, 1990 WL 48634

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 20, 1990

DocketNo. 89-02507

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 561 So. 2d 343 (Levoyant 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.

Bluebook

Levoyant v. State, 561 So. 2d 343, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2657, 1990 WL 48634 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the denial of defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. We agree with the trial court that the defendant was not shown to have standing to file the motion. The term of incarceration to which he had been sentenced had been completed. While he apparently was subject to a detainer issued by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the trial court having recommended his deportation following his incarceration, there was no showing that as a result thereof he continued to be held in state custody and was in such custody at the time his 3.850 motion was filed. See Bolyea v. State, 508 So.2d 457, 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), approved, State v. Bolyea, 520 So.2d 562 (Fla.1988). See also D’Ambrosio v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 710 F.Supp. 269 (N.D.Cal.1989).

Affirmed.

RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PARKER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the denial of defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. We agree with the trial court that the defendant was not shown to have standing to file the motion. The term of incarceration to which he had been sentenced had been completed. While he apparently was subject to a detainer issued by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the trial court having recommended his deportation following his incarceration, there was no showing that as a result thereof he continued to be held in state custody and was in such custody at the time his 3.850 motion was filed. See Bolyea v. State, 508 So.2d 457, 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), approved, State v. Bolyea, 520 So.2d 562 (Fla.1988). See also D’Ambrosio v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 710 F.Supp. 269 (N.D.Cal.1989).

Affirmed.

RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PARKER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

561 So. 2d 343, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 2657, 1990 WL 48634, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levoyant-v-state-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack