Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Young v. State

Young v. State

662 So. 2d 970, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 10474, 1995 WL 584218
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Young v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 608 So. 2d 111 →
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 6, 1995·No. No. 95-2298·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

WRIT DENIED. See State v. District Court of Appeal, First District, 569 So.2d 439 (Fla.1990) (rule 3.850 prohibits habeas petitions raising issues cognizable under the rule); Plez v. State, 635 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed more than two years after conviction became final, was time barred under rule prohibiting habeas when there is an adequate remedy available under rule 3.850); Wilson v. State, 557 So.2d 190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (habeas petition correctly construed as untimely motion for post-conviction relief).

COBB, THOMPSON and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

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

Young v. State, 662 So. 2d 970, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 10474, 1995 WL 584218 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

662 So. 2d 970 (Young v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Dist. Ct. of Appeal, First Dist.
569 So. 2d 439 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1990)
Wilson v. State
557 So. 2d 190 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Plez v. State
635 So. 2d 1087 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)