Soirelus v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Soirelus v. State

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

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 10, 2000·No. No. 5D99-2384·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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] Bryan 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] Bryan 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.

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

Pincite

751 So. 2d 776 (Soirelus v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related