Braverman v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1ConcurrenceSchwartz, Judge
(specially concurring).
I concur in the court’s opinion and judgment of reversal. I would add only that, in my view, the result is not contrary to the rule that issues “actually raised”1 and considered in prior proceedings may not again be presented in a motion under Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.850. Whitney v. State, 184 So.2d 207, 209 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966), cert. denied, 192 So.2d 490 (Fla.1966); see, Jones v. Wainwright, 252 So.2d 570 (Fla.1971); Kendrick v. State, 353 So.2d 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (precluding 3.850 claim that plea was involuntary when issue had been determined in previous appeal). This…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Sanders v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Whitney v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1966
- State v. BravermanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977
- Kendrick v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978