Goodman v. State

Herbert GOODMAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 11, 2008.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 2008-06-11

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently October 2008

2 state decisions

Relies on 848 So. 2d 287 - State v. McBride · 931 So. 2d 1000 - Pleasure v. State · 973 So. 2d 437 - In re Amendments to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.430

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2008-06-11

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Herbert Goodman, in proper person. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, for appellee.

¶2Before SHEPHERD, CORTIÑAS, and SALTER, JJ.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4Based on our review of a prior motion for postconviction relief filed by the defendant, Goodman v. State, 973 So.2d 454, 2007 WL 4249866 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (table) (affirming the lower court's summary denial of postconviction relief), we find that the defendant's current motion is successive, and that the defendant is not entitled to further relief. See State v. McBride, *608 848 So.2d 287 (Fla.2003); Pleasure v. State, 931 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006) (holding that a defendant is not entitled to successive review of an issue already decided against him on its merits). We therefore affirm.

¶5Affirmed.