MICHAEL LETRAYAL REESE, 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 affirmed the summary denial of Reese's habeas corpus petition because his claims were previously raised or could have been raised on direct appeal or in a timely postconviction motion, and habeas corpus cannot substitute for postconviction relief.
A petition for writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to test the legality of a conviction as a substitute for a motion for postconviction relief or to circumvent the two-year filing deadline for such motions.
[1] A petition for writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to test the legality of a prisoner's conviction as a substitute for a motion for postconviction relief or to circumven…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMichael Letrayal Reese was convicted of trafficking in cocaine on March 22, 2000, after a jury trial. His conviction and sentence were affirmed on dir…
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 Finality Of Conviction cases and more on FLexlaw
On March 22, 2000, the appellant, Michael Letrayal Reese (“Reese”), was convicted of trafficking in cocaine after a jury trial. His conviction and sentence were subsequently affirmed on direct appeal. Reese v. State, 793 So.2d 959 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (table). Reese’s motion for postcon-viction relief filed on November 14, 2001, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 was also denied, and that denial was affirmed by this Court on September 11, 2002. Reese v. State, 826 So.2d 310 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002) (table). After an unsuccessful petition for writ of habeas corpus in the federal district court, Reese filed the instant petition for writ of habeas corpus with the Eleventh Judicial Circuit Court of Florida. Reese appeals the trial court’s summary denial of this petition. We affirm. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236, 1240-41 (Fla.2004) (holding that a petition for writ of habeas corpus cannot be used to test the legality of a prisoner’s conviction as a substitute for a motion for postconviction relief); Frazier v. State, 898 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (stating that a petition for habeas corpus cannot be used to circumvent the two-year period for filing motions for postconviction relief).
Because the claims raised in the instant petition were previously raised or could have been raised on direct appeal or in a timely filed motion for postconviction relief, we affirm the trial court’s denial of the petition.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004)
- Terence A. Frazier v. State, 898 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)