State v. Lopez

785 So. 2d 667, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 6175, 2001 WL 484476
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 9, 2001
DocketNo. 3D00-2552
StatusPublished

This text of 785 So. 2d 667 (State v. Lopez) 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
State v. Lopez, 785 So. 2d 667, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 6175, 2001 WL 484476 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order granting defendant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that defendant did not lack due diligence in bringing his claim and that there was not inordinate prejudice to the state. See State v. Perry, 786 So.2d 554 (Fla.2001), and cases cited therein. Contrary to the state’s assertion the transcript of the evi-dentiary hearing demonstrates that the trial court properly addressed the laches issue and properly found that Gregersen v. State, 714 So.2d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), affirming, 758 So.2d 106 (Fla.2000) is factually distinguishable.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Gregersen v. State
714 So. 2d 1195 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
State v. Perry
786 So. 2d 554 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
785 So. 2d 667, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 6175, 2001 WL 484476, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-lopez-fladistctapp-2001.