Legal Opinion

Perez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 24, 2013No. 4D12-1770PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtForst, J.

We affirm the summary denial of appellant’s timely Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.850 motion. We conclude that the claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel filed in reliance on Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), was appropriately denied, because the “new rule” set forth in Padilla does not apply retroactively, as the appellant’s conviction had become final and he had filed neither a direct appeal nor a Rule 3.850 motion prior to the Padilla decision.

On October 7, 2009, Wilber Perez entered a negotiated plea to manufacturing cannabis and…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  4. Padilla v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 2010
  5. Linkletter v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. TejeiroNew Mexico Court of Appeals · 2014
  2. Odegaard v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
  3. Patel v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
  4. Roger Lopez v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
  5. State v. Ogando-DeberasDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API