Van Poyck v. State
816 So. 2d 208, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6155, 2002 WL 882437
Opinion
Defendant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus is barred as successive. See, e.g., Walker v. State, 814 So.2d 516 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002). “The defendant is abusing the judicial process by filing successive motions that attempt to litigate issues that were, could, or should have been raised either on direct appeal or in his previous motions.” Duncan v. State, 728 So.2d 1237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Van Poyck v. State, 816 So. 2d 208, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 6155, 2002 WL 882437 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).
816 So. 2d 208 (Van Poyck v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Duncan v. State
728 So. 2d 1237 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Walker v. State
814 So. 2d 516 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)