MANUEL C. WRIGHT, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1998-01-09
No. 97-05048
Danahy, A.C.J., Altenbernd, J., Northcutt, J.
705 So. 2d 619 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1998)

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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court affirmed summary denial of successive and untimely Rule 3.850 motion but noted Wright may have viable ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim based on counsel's failure to argue that two convictions arose from a single criminal episode.


Holding

A successive and untimely Rule 3.850 motion is properly denied summarily, but the movant may pursue ineffective assistance of appellate counsel if counsel failed to raise meritorious issues on direct appeal.


Headnotes

[1] A Rule 3.850 motion that is successive and untimely may be summarily denied, but the movant retains the right to petition for relief based on ineffective assistance of ap…

Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“A review of his previously filed motions for postconviction relief suggests that such a petition may be well taken.”

Court's observation that Wright has grounds to pursue ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim.

Facts & Procedural History

Manuel C. Wright received three consecutive ten-year sentences as a habitual violent offender in November 1992. On direct appeal in February 1994, his…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Manuel C. Wright appeals an order summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm this order without prejudice to Mr. Wright’s option to file a timely petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. See Fla. RApp. P. 9.140(j). We affirm the trial court’s order because the motion which is the subject of this appeal was successive and untimely.

We observe that Mr. Wright still has the ability to file a petition in this court. A review of his previously filed motions for postconviction relief suggests that such a petition may be well taken. Mr. Wright received three consecutive ten-year terms of incarceration as a habitual violent offender in November 1992. On direct appeal, his specially appointed public defender filed a brief in February 1994, but failed to argue that two of these three convictions arose out of one episode. This issue was not raised, even though the supreme court’s decision in Hale v. State, 630 So. 2d 521 (Fla.1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 909, 115 S.Ct. 278, 130 L.Ed.2d 195 (1994), was issued in October 1993.1 The record currently before this court strongly suggests that the convictions for battery on a law enforcement officer and resisting arrest with violence occurred in one criminal episode and that the two sentences for those convictions should have been imposed concurrently.

Affirmed.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and NORTHCUTT, JJ., concur. . Rehearing was denied in Hale on February 9, 1994.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw