GONZALO PAEZ, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Motion For Postconviction Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Paez appeals from the trial court’s order denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. Where a defendant’s judgment and sen tence were finalized after 1984, the rule requires that such motions be filed no later than two years from the date the judgment and sentence become final, absent allegations that “(1) the facts upon which the claim is predicated were unknown to the movant or his attorney and could not have been ascertained by the exercise of due diligence, or (2) the fundamental constitutional right asserted was not established within the period provided for herein and has been held to apply retroactively.” Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. Paez’s motion was not filed until May 7, 1987, more than two years after the date his judgment and sentence became final, which was May 3, 1985, according to Paez’s own motion. Furthermore, Paez’s motion did not contain allegations of either of the exceptions listed in rule 3.850. Therefore, the trial court properly denied Paez’s motion. Accordingly, the order under review is
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blaine Elkins v. State, 555 So. 2d 441 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…Procedure. No facts have been alleged by the defendant upon which it could be inferred that the facts or the legal basis upon which the claim was predicated were unknown to the defendant. See Demps v. State, 515 So. 2d 196 (Fla.1987); Paez v. State, 512 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Golphin v. State, 522 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Grooms v. State, 522 So. 2d 445 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). 5. The Court also finds that the present motion should be denied, because it is a successive motion which raises claims…
-
Austin v. State, 527 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…iction relief returns to the sentencing court). Appellant has not alleged that the facts upon which his claim is predicated have just become known or that his claim is based on a newly established fundamental constitutional right. Cf. Paez v. State, 512 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Appellant contends that his judgment and sentence were not final until his petition for writ of habeas corpus was disposed of by the supreme court, but the rules do not provide for a stay of mandate pending review by petition fo…
-
Coleman v. State, 616 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…[*641] PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court’s summary denial of appellant’s rule 3.850 motion, inter alia, as being untimely filed. Paez v. State, 512 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). AFFIRMED. GLICKSTEIN, C.J., and LETTS and POLEN, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence