Wright v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Wright v. State

218 So. 2d 500

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 7, 1969

DocketNo. 68-574

StatusPublished

This text of 218 So. 2d 500 (Wright 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

Wright v. State, 218 So. 2d 500 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION TO QUASH

PER CURIAM.

The state has moved to quash this appeal, which is from an order of the circuit court denying a post-conviction motion for discharge under Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850, 33 F.S.A.

Petitioner-appellant is currently in custody serving a valid sentence in state prison imposed on September 1, 1967, as the result of a jury verdict of guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony.

In his motion for post-conviction relief, petitioner has attacked a judgment and sentence dated December 11, 1957, in which he was found guilty of exhibiting obscene literature. In petitioner’s motion for post-conviction relief, he has not attacked the validity of the sentence for which he is currently in custody.

Therefore, the motion to quash is granted under the authority of Johnson v. State, Fla.1966, 184 So.2d 161; Escue v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 524, and Yates v. State, Fla.App.1967, 199 So.2d 340.

LILES, C. J., and HOBSON and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.

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

ON MOTION TO QUASH

PER CURIAM.

The state has moved to quash this appeal, which is from an order of the circuit court denying a post-conviction motion for discharge under Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850, 33 F.S.A.

Petitioner-appellant is currently in custody serving a valid sentence in state prison imposed on September 1, 1967, as the result of a jury verdict of guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony.

In his motion for post-conviction relief, petitioner has attacked a judgment and sentence dated December 11, 1957, in which he was found guilty of exhibiting obscene literature. In petitioner’s motion for post-conviction relief, he has not attacked the validity of the sentence for which he is currently in custody.

Therefore, the motion to quash is granted under the authority of Johnson v. State, Fla.1966, 184 So.2d 161; Escue v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 524, and Yates v. State, Fla.App.1967, 199 So.2d 340.

LILES, C. J., and HOBSON and Mc-NULTY, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

218 So. 2d 500, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wright-v-state-fladistctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack