Eloisaint v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
Magela Eloisaint appeals from the trial court’s denial of relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm.
This is Eloisaint’s second petition for 3.850 relief, filed beyond the two-year window set forth in that rule. See also Peart v. State, 756 So.2d 42 (Fla.2000). The petitioner’s claim for relief sets forth facts that were or could have been known at the time of her first 3.850 petition, which was also filed beyond the two-year filing window. See Foster v. State, 614 So.2d 455, 458 (Fla.1992)(“A successive motion may be dismissed if it fails to allege new or…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Peart v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2000
- Foster v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
3Cited by1 opinion
- Franklin v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2006