JOHNNY C. YOUNG, SR., PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
JOHNNY C. YOUNG, SR., PETITIONER,
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
662 So. 2d 970
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1995)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
WRIT DENIED. See State v. District Court of Appeal, First District, 569 So. 2d 439 (Fla.1990) (rule 3.850 prohibits habeas petitions raising issues cognizable under the rule); Plez v. State, 635 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (petition for writ of habeas corpus, filed more than two years after conviction became final, was time barred under rule prohibiting habeas when there is an adequate remedy available under rule 3.850); Wilson v. State, 557 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (habeas petition correctly construed as untimely motion for post-conviction relief).
COBB, THOMPSON and ANTOON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Teca, Inc. v. Wm-Tab, Inc., 726 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…date of the sale or, in the alternative, the difference in value between the purchase price and the actual value at the time of the sale. U.S.B. Acquisition Co. v. Stamm, 660 So. 2d 1075, 1079 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); see also Concept, L.C. v. Gesten, 662 So. 2d 970 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995). In this case there was no testimony fixing the actual value of the business on the date of the sale, a crucial element in the damage equation. Appellee’s business damages expert was an accountant who testified that the road pro…
-
Earnest Stanberry, Jr. v. Escambia Cnty., 813 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…. The fact that the trial court granted remittitur without providing the plaintiff the opportunity for a new trial, in violation of section 768.74(4), Florida Statutes (2001), does not make the order under review final. Cf. Concept, L.C. v. Gesten, 662 So. 2d 970, 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); Regency Lake Apartments Assocs. v. French, 590 So. 2d 970, 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Lewis v. Evans, 406 So. 2d 489, 491 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981); Burleson v. Stark, 357 So. 2d 1038, 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Ellis v. Golconda Cor…
-
In re Est. OF Gwendolyn Gaffney Willis v. Gaffney, 677 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)…2d 1149, 1150-1151 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981) (citing Sodikoff). Thus, “the character of a motion will depend upon its grounds or contents, and not on its title.” Jones v. Denmark, 259 So. 2d 198, 200 n. 1 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972). Accord Concept, L.C. v. Gesten, 662 So. 2d 970, 973 n. 3 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995) (“Courts now sanction less preciseness in the labeling of motions, looking more to their substance.”). Although not specifically relying on this legal concept, we recognized it implicitly in Rosenthal v. Ford, 443 So.…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Dist. Court of Appeal of Fla., 569 So. 2d 439 (Fla. 1990)
- Plez v. State, 635 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Cueto v. ONE Stop Fashion, Inc., 635 So. 2d 1087 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Wilson v. State, 557 So. 2d 190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)