Legal Opinion

Jolly v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 30, 2013No. 4D11-1812PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We affirm the denial of appellant’s untimely post-conviction motion. A petition for writ of habeas corpus may not be used as a substitute for a rule 3.850 motion. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236, 1241 (Fla.2004); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(Z). As to appellant’s claim that the sentencing court believed that it was required to sentence appellant to the statutory maximum once it concluded that he was a habitual felony offender, see Burdick v. State, 594 So.2d 267 (Fla.1992), appellant fails to show manifest injustice that merits relaxing the pro-eedural bars. Cf. Johnson v. State, 9 So.3d 640…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Baker v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2004
  2. Burdick v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
  3. Johnson v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2009
  4. Prince v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Santos v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API