STERLING CHILDERS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2005-08-24
No. 4D03-4498
WARNER, KLEIN and FARMER, JJ., concur.
909 So. 2d 462 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2005) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that a petition for writ of habeas corpus should be redesignated as a motion for postconviction relief under Rule 3.850, and that the appellant's argument regarding consecutive habitual offender sentences was without merit.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant was found guilty of two strong arm robberies and sentenced to consecutive thirty-year sentences as a habitual offender. This court had previ…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant appeals the summary denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. We redesignate his petition as a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief and affirm. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236, 1241 (Fla.2004) (Habeas corpus may not be used as a substitute for motion seeking postconviction relief pursuant to rule 3.850.).

In two separate cases, appellant was found guilty of two strong arm robberies of the same convenience store, and he was sentenced to consecutive thirty-year sentences with consecutive fifteen-year minimum mandatory sentences as a habitual offender. This court affirmed appeals and the denials of rule 3.850 motions in both cases. Childers v. State, 782 So. 2d 946, 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Childers v. State, 754 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000).

Appellant argues that consecutive habitual offender sentences are improper in this case, because the two robberies should have been considered part of the same criminal episode. See Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521, 526 (Fla.1993). This argument is without merit because the robberies occurred on different dates. In addition, it should have been raised in appellant’s rule 3.850 motions. See Burgess v. State, 831 So. 2d 137, 139 (Fla.2002) (Hale issue must be raised within two years in a rule 3.850 motion).

We have considered the remainder of appellant’s arguments and find them to be without merit. Affirmed.

WARNER, KLEIN and FARMER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Tukes v. State, 115 So. 3d 1014 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
    …that all challenges to a criminal defendant’s conviction or sentence shall be made through a Rule 3.800 or Rule 3.850 motion. Bradley v. Tucker, 95 So. 3d 212 (Fla.2012) (Table) (citing Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla.2004)); Childers v. State, 909 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). Even assuming Tukes filed his request for relief under the appropriate rule, if construed as a motion for post-conviction relief, the motion is facially untimely as it was filed more than seven years after his conviction and sen…
  • Davis v. State, 931 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
    …urt’s order of March 15, 2006, and substitute the following opinion: Appellant’s petition for habeas corpus is re-designated as an appeal from a summary denial of relief under rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. See Childers v. State, 909 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). We affirm. STONE, FARMER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw