Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

758 So. 2d 106

758 So.2d 106

25 Fla.L.WeeklySupp. 328

State v. Gregersen

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided April 27, 2000

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 2000-04-27

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently December 2015

5 state decisions

Relies on 750 So. 2d 592 - Wood v. State · 756 So. 2d 42 - Peart v. State · 705 So. 2d 1059 - Peart v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2000-04-27

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1We have for review Gregersen v. State, 714 So.2d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), which certified conflict with the decision in Peart v. State, 705 So.2d 1059 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const.

¶2This Court recently held in Peart v. State, 756 So.2d 42 (Fla.2000), that a petition for writ of error coram nobis was the proper vehicle for raising a claim that a noncustodial defendant was not advised of the immigration consequences of a plea. We emphasize that all such claims filed subsequent to our decision in Wood v. State, 750 So.2d 592 (Fla.1999), must be filed pursuant to a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Peart, 756 So.2d at 45. Gregersenis approved as being consistent with our decision in Peart.

¶3It is so ordered.

SHAW, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ., concur.HARDING, C.J., and WELLS and QUINCE, JJ., dissent.
/758/so2d/106 · .json · Public domain