Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

104 So. 3d 389

Rabanal v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 2, 2013

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2013-01-02

Relies on 756 So. 2d 42 - Peart v. State · 944 So. 2d 208 - State v. Green

Decided 2013-01-02

PER CURIAM.

¶1Affirmed. See State v. Green, 944 So.2d 208, 217-18 (Fla.2006) (expressly receding from its prior holding in Peart v. State, 756 So.2d 42 (Fla.2000) 1 and holding a defendant seeking to withdraw a plea due to the trial court’s failure to advise him of deportation consequences must file a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure *3908.850 within two years after the judgment and sentence become final and a “defendant filing outside the two-year limitation period must allege and prove that he or she could not have ascertained the immigration consequences of the plea with the exercise of due diligence within the two-year period”)

¶2. In Peart, which is no longer good law in Florida, the court had held the limitations period, for motions claiming a violation of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172(c)(8), begins to run when the defendant knew or should have known of the threat of deportation.

/104/so3d/389 · .json · Public domain