JOEL P. HEILMANN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
JOEL P. HEILMANN, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
832 So. 2d 834
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2002)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Joel P. Heilmann seeks review of the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in the circuit court. Heilmann raises issues which were or could have been raised in the direct appeal of his conviction, and, therefore cannot be raised in a habeas corpus petition. See Teffeteller v. Dugger, 734 So. 2d 1009, 1016 (Fla.1999). Additionally, the issues now asserted were raised in his two prior postconviction proceedings. Accordingly, Heilmann’s petition is successive. See Johnson v. Single-tary, 695 So. 2d 263, 265-66 (Fla.1996).
AFFIRMED.
SHARP, W., GRIFFIN and ORFINGER, R. B., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cook v. Crosby, 914 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…004).1 The trial court denied the [*491] petition and we affirm. Cook has raised this issue in previous post-conviction motions; hence the petition was procedurally barred. See Frazier v. State, 898 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Heilmann v. State, 832 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). AFFIRMED. ERVIN, BARFIELD and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur. . Although a razor knife/box cutter was not designed or constructed to cause death or great bodily harm, it can be a deadly weapon if the defendant uses, threatens…
-
Frison v. State, 838 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…ircuit court. The issue raised by Frison in his petition is identical to the issue raised in two prior Rule 3.800 motions. The denial of those motions were affirmed by this court. Accordingly, Fri-son’s petition is successive. See Heilmann v. State, 832 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). AFFIRMED. GRIFFIN, J., and COBB, W., Senior Judge, concur.…
-
Jenkins v. State, 882 So. 2d 1049 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…t be used for additional appeals on questions that could have been raised on direct appeal, in a Rule 3.850 motion or on matters that were not objected to at trial. Teffeteller v. Dugger, 734 So. 2d 1009, 1025 (Fla.1999); see also Heilmann v. State, 832 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002), rev. dism’d, 845 So. 2d 890 (Fla.2003). Accordingly, we affirm. AFFIRMED. THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Teffeteller v. Dugger, 734 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 1999)
- Johnson v. Singletary, 695 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 1996)