Terence D. Jones v. The State of Florida

• Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida
• Decided: August 7, 2024
• Docket: 2024-0484
• Status: Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed August 7, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-0484 Lower Tribunal No. F08-9474 ________________

Terence D. Jones, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Ramiro C. Areces, Judge.

Terence D. Jones, in proper person.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Sandra Lipman, Senior Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, LINDSEY and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Beiro v. State, 289 So. 3d 511, 511–12 (Fla. 3d DCA

2019) (noting the “extremely limited concept of manifest injustice” and that

“[t]he mere incantation of the words ‘manifest injustice’ does not make it so”);

Cuffy v. State, 190 So. 3d 86, 87 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015) (explaining that “rule

3.850 contains no ‘manifest injustice’ exception to the rule's time limitation or

bar against filing successive postconviction motions”); see also Austin v.

State, 336 So. 2d 480, 481–82 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (“The question of whether

a particular weapon involved is to be classed as ‘deadly’ is a factual question

to be resolved by the jury. The jury's finding must be based upon evidence

or reasonable inferences therefrom of the likelihood to produce death or

great bodily injury. The jury may consider the character of the assault and

the way the weapon is used.” (citations omitted)); Jones v. State, 121 So. 3d

559 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); Jones v. State, 91 So. 3d 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012);

Jones v. State, 88 So. 3d 949 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012); Jones v. State, 38 So. 3d

149 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010).