Penn v. State
This text of 688 So. 2d 450 (Penn 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.
Opinion
Thomas K. PENN, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Thomas K. Penn, Avon Park, Pro Se.
No Appearance for Appellee.
SHARP, W., Judge.
Penn appeals from the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. This is his third motion filed pursuant to Rule 3.850. He seeks to raise the claims that his plea entered below was involuntary and that he had ineffective assistance of counsel. However, Penn made no showing why he could not or should not have raised these grounds in his original Rule 3.850 motion.
We affirm the summary denial of this Rule 3.850 motion. It is successive and improper. See Foster v. State, 614 So.2d 455 (Fla.1992).
AFFIRMED.
HARRIS and ANTOON, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
688 So. 2d 450, 1997 WL 82550, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/penn-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.