Lumley v. Wainwright

227 So. 2d 194, 1969 Fla. LEXIS 2131
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided October 1, 1969·No. No. 38767·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Respondent having filed a response to the order directing him to show lawful cause for the detention and imprisonment of Petitioner, and it appearing Petitioner fails [195] to demonstrate within the meaning and requirements of Schaeffer v. Wainwright (Fla. 1969), 218 So.2d 442, and Powe v. State (Fla. 1968), 216 So.2d 446, the potential existence of those facts necessary to charge the State with the duty of advising Petitioner and providing him with the assistance of counsel for the purpose of directly appealing his judgment of conviction, the writ of habeas corpus is hereby discharged.

It is so ordered.

ERVIN, C. J., and ROBERTS, DREW, THORNAL and CARLTON, JJ., concur.

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

Lumley v. Wainwright, 227 So. 2d 194, 1969 Fla. LEXIS 2131 (Fla. 1969).

227 So. 2d 194 (Lumley v. Wainwright) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Powe v. State
216 So. 2d 446 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1968)
Schaeffer v. Wainwright
218 So. 2d 442 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1969)