HUB FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND MARK A. VAREA, APPELLANTS,

v.

THE RACQUET CLUB OF FORT LAUDERDALE ASSOCIATION, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, NOT-FOR-PROFIT, ET AL., APPELLEES

Citator

Cited By

• Roan Peart v. State, 756 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 2000)
  …gersen rests. The Third District receded from Beckles in this en banc decision. Dugart reaches the conclusion that a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel exists on the basis of the exposure to deportation, citing simply to Dequesada v. State, 444 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Unfortunately, Dequesada has no analysis at all of this issue. In respect to the parts II and III of the majority opinion, I dissent. I would adopt Judge Shevin’s opinion, written on behalf of a unanimous en banc Third District:…
• Richardson v. State, 546 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 1989)
  …50 and others must be brought under coram nobis. We believe the only currently viable use for the writ of error coram nobis is where the defendant is no longer in custody, thereby precluding the use of rule 3.850 as a remedy. See Dequesada v. State, 444 So. 2d 575, 576 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); 28 Fla.Jur.2d Habeas Corpus § 158 (1981). For these reasons, we hold that all newly discovered evidence claims must be brought in a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, and will not be cognizable in…
• Gino B. Vonia v. State, 680 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
  …is hard to make a distinction between a person attacking his conviction on Gideon grounds who is still in custody and one making the same attack who has already served his term.” Weir, 319 So. 2d at 81. [*439] We followed Weir in Dequesada v. State, 444 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), where the defendant would have been able to seek post-eonviction relief on ineffective assistance grounds but for the fact that he was no longer in custody. At the time Weir and Dequesada were decided, the two-year time limit wit…

Authorities Cited

• Mercer v. J.D. Raine, Sr., 443 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 1983)
• A. H. Robins Co., Inc. v. Devereaux, 415 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
• Cem-A-Care OF Fla., Inc. v. Automated Planning Sys., Inc., 442 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)