Stroup v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Stroup v. State

270 So. 2d 47

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 13, 1972

DocketNo. 72-899

StatusPublished

This text of 270 So. 2d 47 (Stroup 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

Stroup v. State, 270 So. 2d 47 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner alleges in his petition that he is presently confined in the Federal Correctional Institution in Texarkana, Texas. He further alleges that in 1958 he was convicted of robbery in the Criminal Court of Hillsborough County, Florida and upon conviction was adjudged guilty and sentenced to three (3) years in prison. He further alleges that during the entire proceedings in Florida he was without benefit of counsel, never informed of his right to counsel, was without funds to obtain counsel and at no time did he waive counsel.

Petitioner filed a motion for post-conviction relief under the provisions of Rule 3.850 FRCrP, 33 F.S.A. in the Criminal Court of Hillsborough County, Florida in March 1972. This motion was denied in May 1972 on the grounds that the sentence had expired. Petitioner did not appeal the denial of his motion.

We must deny the present petition; however, such denial is without prejudice to petitioner’s right to file another motion under Rule 3.850 FRCrP in view of the recent case of Wilcox v. State, 267 So.2d 15 (Fla.App.1972) and the cases cited therein.

Petition denied without prejudice.

PIERCE, C. J., and HOBSON and Mc-NULTY, JT., concur.

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

ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner alleges in his petition that he is presently confined in the Federal Correctional Institution in Texarkana, Texas. He further alleges that in 1958 he was convicted of robbery in the Criminal Court of Hillsborough County, Florida and upon conviction was adjudged guilty and sentenced to three (3) years in prison. He further alleges that during the entire proceedings in Florida he was without benefit of counsel, never informed of his right to counsel, was without funds to obtain counsel and at no time did he waive counsel.

Petitioner filed a motion for post-conviction relief under the provisions of Rule 3.850 FRCrP, 33 F.S.A. in the Criminal Court of Hillsborough County, Florida in March 1972. This motion was denied in May 1972 on the grounds that the sentence had expired. Petitioner did not appeal the denial of his motion.

We must deny the present petition; however, such denial is without prejudice to petitioner’s right to file another motion under Rule 3.850 FRCrP in view of the recent case of Wilcox v. State, 267 So.2d 15 (Fla.App.1972) and the cases cited therein.

Petition denied without prejudice.

PIERCE, C. J., and HOBSON and Mc-NULTY, JT., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

270 So. 2d 47, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stroup-v-state-fladistctapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack