THOMAS SHANE HERNDON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
THOMAS SHANE HERNDON, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
939 So. 2d 172
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2006)
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We affirm without prejudice to appellant raising issue III in a timely rule 3.850 motion. See Patterson v. State, 904 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Keifner v. State, 896 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Zuluaga v. State, 793 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). As in Patterson, “[w]e do not have a sufficient record to determine whether, if appellant does file a rule 3.850 motion, it would be successive under rule 3.850(f), and this opinion should not be construed as deciding that issue.” Id. at 593; Keifner, 896 So. 2d at 956.
STEVENSON, C.J., FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Heldrado A. Zuluaga v. State, 793 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)
- Keifner v. State, 896 So. 2d 955 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- Patterson v. State, 904 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- Figueroa v. Variety Child's. Hosp. & Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 904 So. 2d 593 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)