Markland v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Markland v. State

742 So. 2d 325, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9705, 1999 WL 510745

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 21, 1999·No. No. 99-1639·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s claims under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 are time-barred. See id. R. 3.850(b). None of appellant’s claims qualify under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). As to the double jeopardy claims, see Novaton v. State 634 So.2d 607 (Fla.1994). As to the claims based on State v. Gray, 654 So.2d 552 (Fla.1995), see State v. Woodley, 695 So.2d 297, 298 (Fla.1997) (stating that the decision in Gray is not retroactive).

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant’s claims under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 are time-barred. See id. R. 3.850(b). None of appellant’s claims qualify under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). As to the double jeopardy claims, see Novaton v. State 634 So.2d 607 (Fla.1994). As to the claims based on State v. Gray, 654 So.2d 552 (Fla.1995), see State v. Woodley, 695 So.2d 297, 298 (Fla.1997) (stating that the decision in Gray is not retroactive).

Affirmed.

Markland v. State, 742 So. 2d 325, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 9705, 1999 WL 510745 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

742 So. 2d 325 (Markland v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related