JAMES L. BOND, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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.
James L. Bond appeals the denial of his third motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, raising claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court affirms, finding that Bond's claims were either previously raised or could have been raised in his earlier 3.850 motions.
The court affirms the trial court's denial of Bond's postconviction relief motion, concluding that the claims raised were either previously raised or could have been raised in his earlier 3.850 motions and therefore are barred.
[1] A motion for postconviction relief is subject to denial if its claims were previously raised or could have been raised in prior motions.
[2] A defendant is procedurally barred from raising claims in a subsequent motion for postconviction relief that were or could have been litigated in prior motions.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“As this is the defendant's third 3.850 motion in Case No. 00-24539 and his second such motion in Case No. 00-14939, and we conclude that the claims raised were previously raised or could have been raised in the defendant's prior 3.850 motions, we affirm the trial court's denial of the instant motion.”
Establishes the court's holding that successive 3.850 motions raising claims that were or could have been previously raised are barred.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBond pleaded guilty in February 2002 to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and strong arm robbery. He was sentenced in March 2002 to ten yea…
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 Habitual Violent Felony Offender cases and more on FLexlaw
ROTHENBERG, Judge.
The defendant, James L. Bond, appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for posteonvietion relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. As we conclude that the claims raised in the instant motion are claims which were previously raised or are claims which could have been raised in the defendant’s previous 3.850 motions, we affirm.
On February 25, 2002, the defendant pled guilty in Case No. 00-24.589 to possession of a firearm by a convicted felon and other charges, and in Case No. 00-14939 to strong arm robbery. On March 27, 2002, he was sentenced to ten years as a habitual violent offender with a ten-year minimum mandatory on each case, with the sentences running concurrent with each other. On November 6, 2002, the defendant filed his first 3.850 motion, which was filed as to Case No. 00-24539 only. All three grounds raised alleged ineffective assistance of trial counsel. This motion was denied by the trial court on February 12, 2003, as the defendant’s claims were refuted by the record, and this court affirmed the trial court’s denial on May 28, 2003. See Bond v. State, 847 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003).
On April 22, 2004, the defendant filed another motion for postconviction relief pursuant to rule 3.850 under both case numbers, 00-24539 and 00-14939, again alleging various claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. This was his second 3.850 motion filed in Case No. 00-24539 and his first 3.850 motion filed in Case No. 00-14939. The motion was denied by the trial court on May 24, 2004, and affirmed by this court on appeal on September 22, 2004. Bond v. State, 883 So. 2d 807 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004).
In January 2005, the defendant filed a motion under both case numbers for post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800, which was denied by the trial court on March 8, 2005, and affirmed on appeal by this court on May 25, 2005. Bond v. State, 902 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005).
On November 18, 2005, the defendant filed the instant 3.850 motion for postcon-viction relief under both ease numbers, alleging various claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. As this is the defendant’s third 3.850 motion in Case No. 00-2Í539 and his second such motion in Case No. 00-14939, and we conclude that the claims raised were previously raised or could have been raised in the defendant’s prior 3.850 motions, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the instant motion. See Zeigler v. State, 632 So. 2d 48, 51 (Fla. 1993); Foster v. State, 614 So. 2d 455, 458 (Fla.1992); Franklin v. State, 923 So. 2d 1199, 1199 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Ragan v. State, 643 So. 2d 1175, 1176 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McArthur v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)…nstituted an abuse of the procedure or there was no good cause for the failure of the defendant or defendant's counsel to have asserted those grounds in a prior motion.”); see also Perez v. State, 34 So. 3d 99, 100 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010); Bond v. State, 931 So. 2d 1043, 1043–44 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006); Ragan v. State, 643 So. 2d 1175, 1176 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994).…
Authorities Cited
- Foster v. State, 614 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 1992)
- Zeigler v. State, 632 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 1993)
- Ragan v. State, 643 So. 2d 1175 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Franklin v. State, 923 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- Bond v. State, 902 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Parham v. State, 902 So. 2d 287 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)