ELWOOD LAMAR ALBRIGHT, 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.
Albright appeals the denial of his post-conviction motion under Florida Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850 to vacate a 1965 armed robbery conviction and 30-year sentence. The court affirmed the dismissal of his motion, finding that his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, denial of a sanity hearing, and denial of a continuance were previously litigated and meritless.
The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the motion without hearing, concluding that all of Albright's claims had been previously litigated and decided on the merits in his direct appeal and were without merit.
[1] A motion to vacate a judgment and sentence under CrPR 1.850 is properly denied without a hearing if it states insufficient facts to warrant relief.
[2] Appellate courts will not reconsider issues that have already been decided on a previous direct appeal from the judgment and sentence.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Florida law prohibits the granting of a said motion where previous appeals have used the same grounds without merit.”
Legal principle preventing relitigation of meritless claims already decided
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAlbright was indicted for armed robbery in September 1965 and convicted by jury on December 29, 1965, receiving a 30-year sentence. He appealed direct…
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 Crpr 1.850 cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant Elwood Lamar Albright appeals to this Court from an order denying his motion under CrPR 1.850, 33 F.S.A., to vacate a previous judgment and sentence entered and imposed upon him.
On September 28, 1965, Albright with another was informed against in the Hills-*642borough County Criminal Court of Record for the offense of armed robbery, and upon trial was found guilty of said offense by a jury on December 29, 1965. He was thereupon adjudged guilty and sentenced to serve a term of thirty years in the State Prison. He appeals said conviction to this Court, and on October 12, 1966, this Court, in an opinion written by Associate Judge Barns, affirmed the conviction. Since then he has filed numerous motions seeking to have the judgment and sentence set aside, finally culminating in a motion filed on February 10, 1970, in the trial Court to vacate the judgment and sentence under CrPR 1.8S0. On March 23, 1970, the motion was denied by the trial Judge without hearing on the ground it stated insufficient facts to warrant relief under the Rule. Albright now appeals to this Court from the order of denial.
In his current motion Albright contended in the trial Court, and now contends here, that (1) he was denied a sanity hearing at or before the trial, (2) he was denied a continuance of the trial which he asked for, and (3) the trial Judge failed to appoint “acceptable” counsel before trial.
The local Public Defender, duly appointed by the trial Court to represent Albright on this appeal, filed his brief in this Court setting forth that the grounds urged by Al-bright in his present motion under CrPR 1.850 before the lower Court and also before this Court are “the same grounds * * as in all of his previous motions and appeals” and that he could not in good conscience further prosecute this appeal here on behalf of Albright, observing that “Florida law prohibits the granting of a said motion where previous appeals have used the same grounds without merit.”
On June 23, 1970, pursuant to suggestions made by the U. S. Supreme Court in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, this Court entered order allowing Albright 30 days therefrom to “file an additional brief calling the Court’s attention to any matters that he feels should be considered in connection with the appeal in this cause”. On June 29, 1970, Albright filed herein a handwritten copy of “brief” on his behalf.
We have given careful and conscientious consideration to the contents of said “brief” as well as the entire record in both the instant appeal and the former direct appeal from the judgment and sentence and must conclude that reversible error has not been made to appear here. All the points now made and urged by and on behalf of Albright were decided and put to rest by the very excellent opinion written, by Associate Judge Barns, filed on October 12, 1966, and reported in Fla.App., 191 So.2d 65, in affirming the original conviction. That opinion speaks for itself and is conclusive of all matters now sought to be raised in the instant proceeding.
The order herein appealed is thereupon—
Affirmed.
HOBSON, C. J., and MANN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Earnest Byrd, Jr. v. State, 253 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…tely employed counsel is without merit. It was not properly presentable on a motion for relief under Rule 1.850 where it had been asserted and rejected on direct appeal. Wilcox v. State, Fla.App.1965, 171 So. 2d 427; Albright v. State, Fla.App.1970, 239 So. 2d 641. The challenge to the statute relating to robbery is predicated on an argument of appellant that the statute should be rejected because the penalty it prescribes, of imprisonment “for life or for any lesser term of years, at the discretion of the co…
-
Cooper v. State, 296 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…1966, 184 So. 2d 207; Murray v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 292; Swindle v. State, Fla.App.1967, 202 So. 2d 132; McKenzie v. State, Fla.App. 1967, 202 So. 2d 578; Suarez v. State, Fla.App. 1969, 220 So. 2d 442; Albright v. State, Fla.App. 1970, 239 So. 2d 641; Cobbs v. State, Fla.App. 1970, 241 So. 2d 178; Zide v. State, Fla.App.1971, 253 So. 2d 917; Cooper v. State, Fla.App.1972, 261 So. 2d 859.…
-
McCLUSTER v. Louie L. Wainwright, 453 F.2d 162 (5th Cir. 1972)…roceedings. See, Powell v. State, 244 So. 2d 746 (Fla.App.1st 1971); Tafero v. State, 242 So. 2d 470 (Fla.App.3rd 1971); Bretti v. State, 239 So. 2d 527 (Fla.App.3rd 1970); Peterson v. State, 237 So. 2d 223 (Fla.App.1st 1970); and Albright v. State, 239 So. 2d 641 (Fla.App.2nd 1970). 5. Additionally, the principle of res judicata is applicable in Florida to points raised by a post-conviction collateral attack motion which were raised in a prior appeal. See, e. g., Suarez v. State, 220 So. 2d 442 (Fla.App.3rd…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Elwood Lamar Albright v. State, 191 So. 2d 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)