DARREN L. WASHINGTON, 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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of the defendant's petition for writ of habeas corpus.
The defendant pleaded guilty to second-degree murder and firearm offenses, receiving concurrent sentences. He later filed a petition for writ of habea…
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 Writ Of Habeas Corpus cases and more on FLexlaw
PARIENTE, Judge.
Defendant appeals from an order of the trial court denying defendant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. We summarily affirm the trial court’s order pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a).
Procedurally, defendant pled guilty in 1989 to second-degree murder and was sentenced to 40 years imprisonment. He also pled guilty to carrying a concealed firearm and possession of a firearm by a felon and was sentenced to 5 years and 15 years respectively, with each sentence to run concurrently. In this 1995 petition for writ of habeas corpus, defendant claims that his convictions for carrying a concealed weapon and possession of a firearm by a felon are violative of double jeopardy and constitute a denial of due process.
Although styled as a petition for habeas corpus, the issues raised are of the type which should have been properly raised under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See White v. Dugger, 511 So. 2d 554, 555 (Fla.1987). For that reason alone, the trial court’s order is proper. Moreover, defendant’s request is both time-barred under rule 3.850 and legally without merit. His conviction for carrying a concealed weapon and possession of a firearm by a felon do not violate double jeopardy principles or due process. See Skeens v. State, 556 So. 2d 1113 (Fla.1990); Johnson v. State, 535 So. 2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).
Accordingly the order of the trial court is affirmed.
GLICKSTEIN and WARNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Galloway v. State, 680 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…PER CURIAM. We affirm Appellant’s convictions for carrying a concealed firearm and for possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. See Skeens v. State, 556 So. 2d 1113 (Fla.1990); Washington v. State, 661 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), cause dismissed, 669 So. 2d 252 (Fla.1996); Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 304, 52 S.Ct. 180,182, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932). We have considered State v. Stearns, 645 So. 2d 417 (Fla.1994), in which the supreme court rever…
-
Allen v. State, 805 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Washington v. State, 661 So. 2d 1294 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). BOOTH and WEBSTER, JJ., and SMITH, LARRY G., Senior Judge, concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Beauford White v. Dugger, 511 So. 2d 554 (Fla. 1987)
- Rommell Johnson v. State, 535 So. 2d 651 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Skeens v. State, 556 So. 2d 1113 (Fla. 1990)