THEODORE MACARTHUR, PETITIONER,
v.
MICHAEL W. MOORE, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
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 petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied because it was untimely filed and petitioner did not allege he was affirmatively misled by counsel.
Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The petition was filed beyond the two-year limitation period.…
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 Postconviction Motions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We deny Theodore MacArthur’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. The petition is untimely filed beyond the two-year limitation period imposed by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(j)(3)(B), where the petitioner has not alleged under oath with a specific factual basis that he was affirmatively misled about the results of the appeal by counsel.
“Deficient performance is only the first part of the inquiry, even where petitioner can point to a deficiency in counsel’s performance that deficiency will not warrant granting a Writ of Habeas Corpus if counsel’s errors had no effect on the outcome of his case. Counsel’s deficiencies in performance must be prejudicial to petitioner and petitioner must affirmatively demonstrate that prejudice. It is not enough that petitioner show that counsel’s errors conceivably had some effect on the outcome of the proceeding, petitioner must show that, but for counsel’s errors, a different result would have been reached.”
Barclay v. Singletary, 642 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (citations omitted). Furthermore, a petition for writ of habeas corpus that is in effect a successive motion for postconviction relief is procedurally barred. See Ali v. State, 729 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Phillips v. Singletary, 728 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Morejon v. State, 740 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); see also Robinson v. State, 707 So. 2d 688 (Fla.1998)(holding that defendant who seeks postconviction relief is procedurally barred from raising claims that could or should have been raised on direct appeal); Morejon v. State, 729 So. 2d 933 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). See also Calloway v. State, 699 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (holding that habeas petition cannot be used to circumvent the limitations period imposed by rule 3.850).
The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Everett v. State, 928 So. 2d 1241 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…ch was denied by the trial court and affirmed by this court on direct appeal. A defendant seeking postconviction relief is proeedurally barred from raising claims that he could have raised and should have raised on direct appeal. MacArthur v. Moore, 756 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); see also Harvey v. Dugger, 656 So. 2d 1253, 1256 (Fla.1995)(postconviction proceedings are not to be used as a second appeal). As the defendant could have raised the grounds now raised when he filed, litigated, and appealed his m…
-
Allen v. State, 917 So. 2d 906 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)…ffective assistance of counsel. As we conclude that the issues raised are either time barred, see Fla. R.App. P. 9.141(c)(4)(B); Partridge v. Moore, 768 So. 2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), review denied, 789 So. 2d 347 (Fla.2001); MacArthur v. Moore, 756 So. 2d 232, 233 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); and/or procedurally barred as successive; and/or have been previously raised and are therefore barred by the doctrines of the law of the case and res judicata, we deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus. See King v. Stat…
Authorities Cited
- Robinson v. State, 707 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 1998)
- Calloway v. State, 699 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)
- Kasim ALI v. State, 729 So. 2d 963 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Phillips v. Singletary, 728 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Barclay v. Hairy K. Singletary, 642 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)