THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
CHARLES D. DEARING, JR., 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.
Florida's appeal of a habeas corpus release order is granted; successive habeas petitions raising previously rejected grounds are subject to summary denial, and a sister state's dismissal of extradition proceedings does not bar Florida from enforcing its criminal judgment.
A successive habeas corpus petition raising grounds previously considered and rejected is subject to summary denial, and a sister state's dismissal of extradition proceedings does not bar subsequent enforcement of a Florida criminal judgment.
[1] A successive habeas corpus petition raising grounds previously considered and rejected by the court is subject to summary denial and cannot be properly entertained by the…
[2] A sister state's dismissal of extradition proceedings does not bar a state from subsequently enforcing its own criminal judgment and sentence against a defendant.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDearing was released on habeas corpus after filing a petition that raised both previously rejected grounds and new grounds based on a sister state's d…
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 Successive Petitions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The state appeals from an order granting appellant’s emergency petition for writ of habeas corpus and ordering his release from custody.1 We reverse, based upon the following brief analysis. First, to the extent that the grounds raised in the instant petition have been previously considered and rejected by this court, Dearing v. State, 469 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985) (mem.) (habeas corpus denied), the instant petition was a successive petition for the same relief, which could not properly be entertained by the trial court and was subject to summary denial, Francois v. Wainwright, 470 So. 2d 685 (Fla.1985); State ex rel. Scaldeferri v. Sandstrom, 285 So. 2d 409 (Fla.1973); State ex rel. Miller v. Kelly, 88 So. 2d 118 (Fla.1956). Second, as to the newly raised grounds, a sister state’s dismissal of earlier Florida extradition proceedings did not bar Florida from subsequently enforcing its criminal judgment and sentence against appellant. Ex Parte Silverman, 69 Ohio App. 128, 42 N.E. 2d 87 (1942). Nor was there a bar in the five-year delay before appellant’s eventual return to Florida pursuant to a Governor’s warrant (during which time appellant was reincarcerated for 4 years and 10 months for violation of his federal parole). See State ex rel. Shotkin v. Buchanan, 149 So. 2d 574, 575 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963).
Reversed.2
. A stay of the release provision was ordered by this court.
. We note, however, that appellant is entitled to credit for time served in the sister state pursuant to the earlier, ultimately unsuccessful, Florida detainer.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Livingston Mason v. State, 627 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…ial Circuit, in October 1991. Because this is a successive petition which raises grounds that were previously raised and disposed of, the ruling of the trial court is affirmed. See Francois v. Wainwright, 470 So. 2d 685 (Fla.1985); State v. Dearing, 513 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Johnson v. State, 390 So. 2d 1234 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). AFFIRMED. HARRIS, C.J., and GRIFFIN, J., concur.…
-
Whetstone v. Freeman, 524 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…borted because a governor’s warrant from the demanding state did not timely arrive in Florida, have no effect upon the efficacy of a subsequent extradition proceeding which, like this one, was properly supported by a valid warrant. State v. Dearing, 513 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Murphy v. Boehm, 443 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); accord, e.g., In re Blackburn, 701 P. 2d 715 (Mont.1985); In re Hval, 148 Vt. 544, 537 A. 2d 135 (1987). Accordingly, the trial judge properly denied Whetstone’s application fo…
-
Brown v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2022)
Authorities Cited
- State of Fla. ex rel. William Scaldeferri v. Sandstrom, 285 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 1973)
- Francois v. Louie L. Wainwright, 470 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 1985)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Rose Miller v. Kelly, 88 So. 2d 118 (Fla. 1956)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Bernard M. Shotkin v. Buchanan, 149 So. 2d 574 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)