Soirelus v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Soirelus v. State

751 So. 2d 776, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 2592, 2000 WL 263182

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 10, 2000

DocketNo. 5D99-2384

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 751 So. 2d 776 (Soirelus 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

Soirelus v. State, 751 So. 2d 776, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 2592, 2000 WL 263182 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

HARRIS, J.

Having considered this habeas corpus petition on the merits (we thus deny the State’s motion to dismiss based on petitioner’s failure to timely file a brief after directed to do so), we affirm the trial court’s denial of relief because the grounds asserted herein could have and should have been raised on direct appeal. See [777]*777Bryan v. Dugger, 641 So.2d 61 (Fla.1994); Gray v. Wainwright, 442 So.2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

AFFIRMED.

ANTOON, C.J., and PETERSON, J., concur.

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

HARRIS, J.

Having considered this habeas corpus petition on the merits (we thus deny the State’s motion to dismiss based on petitioner’s failure to timely file a brief after directed to do so), we affirm the trial court’s denial of relief because the grounds asserted herein could have and should have been raised on direct appeal. See [777]*777Bryan v. Dugger, 641 So.2d 61 (Fla.1994); Gray v. Wainwright, 442 So.2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

AFFIRMED.

ANTOON, C.J., and PETERSON, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

751 So. 2d 776, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 2592, 2000 WL 263182, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/soirelus-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack