FREDERICK W. LODSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A change in law must be announced or adopted by the United States Supreme Court or the Supreme Court of Florida to be a basis for postconviction relief.
Appellant was convicted of vehicular homicide, a crime he argued was not a lesser included offense of the charged DUI manslaughter. He appealed, dismi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Change In Law cases and more on FLexlaw
SCHEB, Judge.
The 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 after the public defender filed an Anders brief,1 Lodson voluntarily dismissed his appeal.
On 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.
We 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).
Although 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).
Affirmed.
GRIMES, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur. . 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 Anders brief is filed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bernt Meyer v. State, 570 So. 2d 1001 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…Court rules that the statute is unconstitutional and determines that such ruling is a development of fundamental significance.2 Witt v. State, 387 So. 2d 922 (Fla.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1067, 101 S.Ct. 796, 66 L.Ed.2d 612 (1980); Lodson v. State, 478 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). Therefore, we treat the order striking the motion as a summary denial of the motion, and affirm. Affirmed. RYDER, A.C.J., and DANAHY and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur. . In November 1987, Mr. Meyer was suspended from the practice of…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Witt v. State, 465 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 1985)
- Higdon v. State, 465 So. 2d 1309 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Jones v. State, 468 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Mastro v. State, 448 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Spillane v. State, 458 So. 2d 838 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)