Perdomo v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Perdomo v. State

837 So. 2d 1089, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 1825, 2003 WL 354809

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 19, 2003

DocketNo. 3D03-91

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 837 So. 2d 1089 (Perdomo 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

Perdomo v. State, 837 So. 2d 1089, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 1825, 2003 WL 354809 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the order denying his motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He cites to Peart v. State, 756 So.2d 42 (Fla.2000), and claims he is about to be deported based on a 1984 plea, where he was not informed of the immigration consequences of that plea. As previously observed, post-conviction relief is not available for the failure to advise a defendant of the immigration consequences of entering a plea prior to the time that the court was placed under a duty to render such an advisement. See Orellanes v. State, 790 So.2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); State v. Paniagua, 789 So.2d 1199 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Here, by defendant’s own admission, the plea at issue occurred several years before the rule providing for notification of deportation consequences. Accordingly, the order under review is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the order denying his motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He cites to Peart v. State, 756 So.2d 42 (Fla.2000), and claims he is about to be deported based on a 1984 plea, where he was not informed of the immigration consequences of that plea. As previously observed, post-conviction relief is not available for the failure to advise a defendant of the immigration consequences of entering a plea prior to the time that the court was placed under a duty to render such an advisement. See Orellanes v. State, 790 So.2d 613 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); State v. Paniagua, 789 So.2d 1199 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). Here, by defendant’s own admission, the plea at issue occurred several years before the rule providing for notification of deportation consequences. Accordingly, the order under review is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

837 So. 2d 1089, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 1825, 2003 WL 354809, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/perdomo-v-state-fladistctapp-2003.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack