NORRIS WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
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 the appellant's motion for writ of error coram nobis was improperly raised and affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief.
Appellant sought post-conviction relief via a writ of error coram nobis, challenging the adequacy of his plea colloquy in prior cases. The trial court…
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 Sentence Enhancement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Norris Williams appeals the trial court order denying his motion for post conviction relief which included a claim for issuance of a writ of error coram nobis. The motion and supporting memorandum of law challenged the adequacy of his plea colloquy in three cases in which appellant’s sentencing became final in 1994 and 1995. The trial court’s amended order being appealed denied appellant’s motion without prejudice to his right to refile another one with the proper verification. The motion contained a defective oath, and the memorandum contained no oath at all.
While appellant’s motion was filed within two years of the decision in Wood v. State, 750 So. 2d 592 (Fla.1999), allowing coram nobis claims to be raised under rule 3.850, it does not raise the type of claims intended for coram nobis relief. Appellant failed to allege new facts or evidence which could not have been known by him or counsel or could not have been ascertained by due diligence. See Hallman v. State, 371 So. 2d 482 (Fla.1979), abrogated on other grounds, Jones v. State, 591 So. 2d 911 (Fla.1991); Donton v. State, 810 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Farah v. State, 762 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). See also State v. Perry, 786 So. 2d 554 (Fla.2001); Baker v. State, 805 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
Further, appellant’s challenge to his pleas for failure to advise him of the possible consequence of enhancement of a future sentence is without merit, as recently announced by the Supreme Court of Florida in Major v. State, 814 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 2002).
For all of these reasons, our affirmance to the trial court’s order is with prejudice, rather than without prejudice as the trial court provided.
WARNER, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Alpert v. Alpert, 886 So. 2d 999 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…to require him to maintain life insurance to secure the Wife’s alimony because the trial [*1003] court did not find any special circumstances to justify such an award and the record does not contain any evidence supporting it. See Cozier v. Cozier, 819 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); Pinion v. Pinion, 818 So. 2d 557 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). The Wife properly concedes error on this point. Accordingly, we reverse this requirement in the final judgment. THE $25,000 DEBT On February 16, 2001, and February 28, 2001,…
-
Bradley v. State, 827 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Major v. State, 814 So. 2d 424 (Fla.2002); Williams v. State, 819 So. 2d 884(Fla. 4th DCA 2002). MINER, PADOVANO and BROWNING, JJ, CONCUR.…
Authorities Cited
- Jones v. State, 591 So. 2d 911 (Fla. 1991)
- Wood v. State, 750 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1999)
- Hallman v. State, 371 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 1979)
- Daron Merritt v. State, 814 So. 2d 424 (Fla. 2002)
- State v. Perry, 786 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 2001)
- Jones v. State, 805 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)
- Farah v. State, 762 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
- Sammie Lee Donton v. State, 810 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)