EVERITTE L. FORBES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1996-07-10
No. 96-1665
Before JORGENSON, COPE and LEVY, JJ.
676 So. 2d 79 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1996) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. State v. Salmon, 636 So. 2d 16 (Fla.1994)(allegations that were or could have been made in previous postconviction motions do not constitute basis for granting later motion); Forbes v. State, 664 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Forbes v. State, 661 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Brown v. State, 689 So. 2d 1280 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)
    …Chaney v. State, 678 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). See also See Berry v. State, 684 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Sullivan v. State, 674 So. 2d 214 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). But see, Bigham v. State, 679 So. 2d 1253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Hood v. State, 676 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996). That exception is not applicable in this case. Accordingly, Brown should have raised his claim for additional time credit in a rule 3.850 motion. We affirm the denial of Brown’s motion filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a). However,…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw