ANTHONY LA MARCA, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that while most issues raised in the second motion for post-conviction relief were procedurally barred, the trial court erred in prohibiting the filing of future motions.
Anthony La Marca appealed the denial of his second motion for post-conviction relief. The issues raised were either previously appealed or addressed i…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Abuse Of Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Anthony La Marca appeals the denial of his second motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm in part and reverse in part. Because the claimed errors were either raised previously on appeal, La Marca v. State, 515 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), or in defendant’s initial motion for post-conviction relief,1 the issues presented are proeedurally barred from consideration. See Kennedy v. State, 547 So. 2d 912 (Fla.1989); Aldridge v. State, 503 So. 2d 1257 (Fla.1987); Booker v. State, 503 So. 2d 888 (Fla.1987); Darden v. State, 496 So. 2d 136 (Fla.1986); Adams v. State, 484 So. 2d 1216 (Fla.1986); Archie v. State, 496 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
However, the trial court erred in ruling that defendant may not file additional 3.850 motions.2 Aikens v. State, 488 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 496 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1986); Stephens v. State, 478 So. 2d 419, 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Fla.R. Crim.P. 3.850 (successive motion may be dismissed where it fails to allege new or different grounds and prior determination was on the merits, or if new or different grounds are alleged and judge finds that failure to assert grounds constitutes an abuse of procedure); cf. Adams v. State, 484 So. 2d 1216 (Fla.1986) (successive motion barred as abuse of procedure governed by the rules where claims were ruled upon in previous 3.850 motion or were or should have been raised on direct appeal). Thus, we reverse that portion of the order. Affirmed in part; reversed in part.
. This court affirmed the denial of defendant’s first motion for post-conviction relief. La Marca v. State, 531 So. 2d 1357 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).
. The state concedes error on this point,
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sias v. State, 559 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. La Marca v. State, 547 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Sias v. State, 455 So. 2d 1341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).…
-
Brown v. State, 650 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…f defendant’s motion for postconvietion relief filed pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. The issues presented are procedurally barred from consideration, as they formed the basis for an earlier motion for postconviction relief.1 See La Marca v. State, 547 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Affirmed. . Brown v. State, 643 So. 2d 1091 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).…
-
Marsh v. State, 574 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984); La Marca v. State, 547 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).…
Authorities Cited
- Kennedy v. State, 547 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 1989)
- Levis Leon Aldridge v. State, 503 So. 2d 1257 (Fla. 1987)
- Adams v. State, 484 So. 2d 1216 (Fla. 1986)
- Booker v. State, 503 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 1987)
- Lamarca v. State, 515 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Aikens v. State, 488 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Darden v. State, 496 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 1986)
- Archie v. State, 496 So. 2d 976 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- Stephens v. State, 478 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)