Rasheed v. State

449 So. 2d 981, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13028
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 10, 1984·No. No. AX-177·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks to raise an issue by motion for post conviction relief, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, which could properly have been litigated during the trial proceedings and reviewed upon direct appeal. Appellant's direct appeal was exhausted by this Court’s affirmance of his conviction and sentence for burglary and grand theft in Rasheed v. State, 433 So.2d 522 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

We affirm the trial court’s denial of relief as appellant’s single issue involved whether the circumstantial evidence presented at his trial was sufficient to support a finding of guilt, an issue not cognizable through collateral attack, see Demps v. State, 416 So.2d 808, 809 (Fla.1982); Meeks v. State, 382 So.2d 673, 675 (Fla. 1980), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1155, 103 S.Ct. 799, 74 L.Ed.2d 1002 (1983).

ERVIN, C.J., and THOMPSON and WIG-GINTON, JJ., concur.

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

Rasheed v. State, 449 So. 2d 981, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13028 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

449 So. 2d 981 (Rasheed v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Green v. State
601 So. 2d 1338 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Hoewischer v. State
474 So. 2d 898 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)