Singletary v. State

925 So. 2d 447, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5067, 2006 WL 932531
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Singletary v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 14384
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 7, 2006·No. No. 2D05-5617·Published

Opinion

LaROSE, Judge.

Martin D. Singletary appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In his motion, Mr. Singletary claims that he is innocent of trafficking in methamphetamine and was entrapped by a law enforcement officer and confidential source. We affirm.

In denying the motion, the postconviction court correctly concluded that claims of innocence and entrapment should have been raised on direct appeal and are, therefore, not appropriate for review under rule 3.850. We note, in addition, that Mr. Singletary entered a nolo contendere plea to the trafficking offense. ■ He reserved no right to appeal any claim. Thus, Mr. Singletary’s plea waived any claims for appeal relating to his conviction. See § 924.06(3), Fla. Stat. (2002); see also Robinson v. State, 373 So.2d 898 (Fla.1979).

Affirmed.

SALCINES and SILBERMAN, JJ„ concur.

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

Singletary v. State, 925 So. 2d 447, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5067, 2006 WL 932531 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

925 So. 2d 447 (Singletary v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Robinson v. State
373 So. 2d 898 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1979)