CLERHAT LEVOYANT, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1990-04-20
No. 89-02507
RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PARKER, JJ., concur.
561 So. 2d 343 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1990) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

[*344] PER CURIAM.

We affirm the denial of defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. We agree with the trial court that the defendant was not shown to have standing to file the motion. The term of incarceration to which he had been sentenced had been completed. While he apparently was subject to a detainer issued by the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the trial court having recommended his deportation following his incarceration, there was no showing that as a result thereof he continued to be held in state custody and was in such custody at the time his 3.850 motion was filed. See Bolyea v. State, 508 So. 2d 457, 458 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), approved, State v. Bolyea, 520 So. 2d 562 (Fla.1988). See also D’Ambrosio v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 710 F.Supp. 269 (N.D.Cal.1989).

Affirmed.

RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PARKER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Gallo v. State, 571 So. 2d 78 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
    …time he initially filed the motion, rather than his status at the time of the hearing after remand (emphasis added). 508 So. 2d at 458. Additionally, in affirming the denial of the defendant’s motion for post conviction relief in Levoyant v. State, 561 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), the court stated: ... there was no showing that as a result thereof he continued to be held in state custody and was in such custody at the time his 3.850 motion was filed (emphasis added). 561 So. 2d at 344. Thus, based on Bol…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw