ALBERTO SOLER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Timeliness Of Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Alberto Soler appeals an order denying his petition for writ of error coram nobis. This is properly viewed as being a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Wood v. State, 750 So. 2d 592 (Fla.1999).
We agree with the trial court that the petition is untimely filed. Defendant-appellant Soler is seeking relief from a conviction incurred in 1990. The Wood decision created a two-year window for such claims, which expired May 27, 2001. Id. at 595.
Defendant filed his petition several months after the Wood window closed. Accordingly the trial court was entirely correct in ruling that the petition is time-barred.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McDANIEL v. State, 24 So. 3d 654 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…iary rules are inapplicable). We note, however, that many of the objeeted-to statements1 were admissible for the limited purpose of impeaching a witness’s testimony with prior inconsistent statements. See § 90.614, Fla. Stat. (2007); Varas v. State, 815 So. 2d 637, 640 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (“It is well-settled [sic] that a witness may be impeached by a prior inconsistent statement, including an omission in a previous out-of-court statement about which the witness testifies at trial, if it is of a material, sign…
-
Gibson v. State, 940 So. 2d 1263 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…can be sustained under the law.’” Law, 559 So. 2d at 189 (citing Lynch v. State, 293 So. 2d at 45 (Fla.1974)). In Varas v. State, the Third District Court of Appeal addressed the necessary showing to sustain a conviction of trafficking in cocaine. 815 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001). It noted: In order to be convicted of the offense of trafficking in cocaine, four elements must be established beyond a reasonable doubt: a) that the defendant knowingly purchased or possessed a certain substance, b) the substan…
-
Pierce v. State, 137 So. 3d 578 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…statement should be admissible as an inconsistent statement.”). This negative impeachment could have allowed counsel to attack the victim’s credibility supporting Mr. Pierce’s argument that the victim fabricated the allegations. See Varas v. State, 815 So. 2d 637, 640 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (“Negative impeachment is more likely deemed to be permissible where a witness appears to be fabricating.”) (citing Morton v. State, 689 So. 2d 259, 264 (Fla.1997) (“[Cjaution should be exercised in permitting impeachment of…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wood v. State, 750 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1999)