¶1We affirm the trial court’s denial of the petition for writ of habeas corpus, because the grounds for relief asserted in the petition should have been presented to the trial court in a timely filed motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See State v. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District, 569 So.2d 439 (Fla.1990); Mack v. State, 586 So.2d 1266 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Hickman v. State, 581 So.2d 942 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); Washington v. State, 576 So.2d 973 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991).
594 So. 2d 858
Curtis v. Chiles
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided March 2, 1992
District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1992-03-02
Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 2001
1 state decisions
Relies on 569 So. 2d 439 - State v. Dist. Ct. of Appeal, First Dist. · 581 So. 2d 942 - Hickman v. State · Holder v. Burger King Corp.
Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1992-03-02
View the full empirical analysis of this case →