Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

478 So. 2d 477

478 So.2d 477

10 Fla.L.Weekly 2549

Lodson v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 13, 1985

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1985-11-13

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1990

1 state decisions

Relies on Anders v. California · 465 So. 2d 510 - Witt v. State · 465 So. 2d 1309 - Higdon v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1985-11-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

SCHEB, Judge.

¶1The state charged appellant Frederick W. Lodson with D.U.I. manslaughter. He pled not guilty and a jury found him guilty of vehicular homicide. Lodson unsuccessfully challenged that verdict by a motion for arrest of judgment. He contended that vehicular homicide was not a lesser included offense of the crime for which he was prosecuted. On March 2, 1983, the trial court sentenced him to three years imprisonment. He appealed to this court, but *478after the public defender filed an Anders brief,1 Lodson voluntarily dismissed his appeal.

¶2On October 5, 1984, Lodson filed an amended motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. On this appeal, he challenges the trial court’s denial of that motion.

¶3We find no merit to Lodson’s challenge. We write, however, to comment on his contention that he is entitled to postconviction relief. Lodson correctly points out that, after he was sentenced, this court held in Mastro v. State, 448 So.2d 626 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984), that vehicular homicide is not a lesser included offense of D.W.I. manslaughter. But see Spillane v. State, 458 So.2d 838 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); cf. Higdon v. State, 465 So.2d 1309 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).

¶4Although appellant correctly recites this court’s holding in Mastro, a change of law must be announced or adopted by the United States Supreme Court or the Supreme Court of Florida before that change can be considered as a basis for postconviction relief. Witt v. State, 465 So.2d 510 (Fla.1985).

¶5Affirmed.

GRIMES, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur.

¶6. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), permits a motion to withdraw where a public defender finds there are no meritorious grounds for appeal. See Jones v. State, 468 So.2d 253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), for a recent explanation of the role of this court when an Andersbrief is filed.

/478/so2d/477 · .json · Public domain