KELVIN BOWMAN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
KELVIN BOWMAN, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
852 So. 2d 289
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2003)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 16 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The Appellant, Kelvin Bowman, appeals the summary denial of his belated Rule 3.850 post-conviction motion. Bowman’s motion is not only untimely, as it was filed well beyond two years after the judgment and sentence in his case became final, but is also successive, as he raises claims of trial court error and ineffective assistance of counsel which could have been raised in a prior 3.850 motion. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b) and (f). Accordingly, his motion for post-conviction relief was properly denied.
AFFIRMED.
SAWAYA, C.J, MONACO and TORPY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Clifton, 905 So. 2d 172 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…n by filing a notice of expiration in accordance with the rule.2 Moreover, the state maintains the [*178] right to amend its information as the prosecution of the defendant progresses as long as the defendant is not prejudiced. In State v. Erickson, 852 So. 2d 289 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003), this court explained: It is well-settled that the state may amend its information pre-trial or even during trial, either as to substantive or non-substantive matters, unless the defendant is prejudiced thereby. E.g., Lackos v.…
-
Cabrera v. State, 884 So. 2d 482 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…cto clause nor Rule 3.800 because the designation ‘sexual predator’ is neither a sentence nor a punishment but simply a status resulting from the conviction of certain crimes.”), review denied, 707 So. 2d 1124 (Fla.1998); see also State v. Erickson, 852 So. 2d 289, 291 n. 1 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) ("Since the courts of Florida have uniformly recognized that the Florida Sexual Predators Act is regulatory in nature and does not constitute punishment subject to constitutional ex post facto challenges, the need for a…
-
State v. Burgess, 153 So. 3d 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…e state may amend its information pre-trial or even during trial, either as to substantive or non-substantive matters, unless the defendant is prejudiced thereby.” State v. Clifton, 905 So. 2d 172, 178 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005) (quoting State v. Erickson, 852 So. 2d 289, 291 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)) (internal quotations omitted). Where the defendant is afforded an adequate opportunity to investigate the evidence and prepare a defense, an amendment to the information is not improper even where the amendment adds a new c…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence