KORMEN BRANCH, 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.
The court held that a petition for writ of habeas corpus is not the proper vehicle for a collateral attack on a conviction or sentence.
[1] A petition for writ of habeas corpus is not the proper vehicle to collaterally attack a judgment or sentence; such challenges must be brought pursuant to Rule 3.800 or 3.…
[2] The circuit court in which a defendant was convicted and sentenced has exclusive jurisdiction to consider collateral attacks on the validity of that judgment or sentence.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBranch was convicted in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit and later filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, challe…
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 Rule 3.850 cases and more on FLexlaw
[*586] LAGOA, J.
Kormen Branch (“Branch”) appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. We affirm the trial court’s order without prejudice for Branch to seek relief in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit.
In 2004, Branch was convicted in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit for delivery of cocaine and sentenced to forty-eight months in prison. On April 17, 2006, Branch filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Eleventh Judicial Circuit. In his petition, Branch contends that his conviction and sentence are illegal because the Broward State Attorney’s Office failed to properly invoke the trial court’s subject matter jurisdiction. The trial court dismissed the petition because the relief Branch sought was a collateral attack on the judgment and conviction, and was, therefore, not properly raised in a habeas petition. This appeal ensued.
As this Court explained in Broom v. State, 907 So. 2d 1261, 1262 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005):
The circuit court of the county in which a defendant is incarcerated has jurisdiction to consider a petition for writ of habeas corpus when the claims raised in the petition concern issues regarding his incarceration, but not when the claims attack the validity of the judgment or sentence. Only the court in which the defendant was convicted and sentenced has jurisdiction to consider collateral attacks on a judgment or sentence, and such an attack must be brought pursuant to Rule 3.800 or 3.850, not by petition for writ of habeas corpus.
(citations omitted).
Because Branch is challenging the nature of his conviction and sentence, and not the conditions of his imprisonment, we agree with the trial court that dismissal was warranted. The Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, where Branch was convicted and sentenced, is the appropriate court for Branch to seek relief. Postconviction challenges must be pursued in the court where the defendant was convicted and sentenced. See Johnson v. State, 947 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007).
Affirmed without prejudice.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Williams v. State, 139 So. 3d 447 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla.2004); State v. King, 426 So. 2d 12 (Fla.1982); Bizzell v. State, 912 So. 2d 386 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005); State v. Broom, 523 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Branch v. State, 990 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Thier v. State, 967 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Broom v. State, 907 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). DAVIS, C.J., and CRENSHAW and BLACK, JJ., Concur.…
-
Steiner v. State, 141 So. 3d 1210 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…2.160, 885 So. 2d 870 (Fla.2004); Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla.2004); Harris v. State, 818 So. 2d 567 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002); State v. Broom, 523 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Marquez v. State, 11 So. 3d 975 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009); Branch v. State, 990 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Thier v. State, 967 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Broom v. State, 907 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). KHOUZAM, MORRIS, and SLEET, JJ., Concur.…
-
Oehling v. State, 147 So. 3d 574 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla.2004); State v. Broom, 523 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Branch v. State, 990 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008); Thier v. State, 967 So. 2d 259 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Broom v. State, 907 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). KELLY, VILLANTI, and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.…
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Broom v. State, 907 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- Jahzwah Johnson v. State, 947 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)