HOWELL M. RAMSEY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Howell M. Ramsey appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He contends that the postconviction court erred in denying his motion for rehearing as untimely. We agree that the motion for rehearing should have been considered on its merits because it was filed within fifteen days of the final order disposing of Ramsey’s claims. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(g). However, we have reviewed the merits of the motion for rehearing and conclude that Ramsey would not have been entitled to relief even if the trial court had considered the merits. We affirm the summary denial of Ramsey’s rule 3.850 motion without further comment.
Affirmed.
WHATLEY and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Evangelista Lopez v. State, 68 So. 3d 332 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…in determining whether ap [*334] pellate counsel’s performance was deficient. However, we apply current law to determine whether Lopez is entitled to relief. See Brown v. State, 25 So. 3d 78, 80 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). Recently, in Del Valle v. State, 52 So. 3d 16 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010), the Second District Court of Appeal reversed Del Valle’s second-degree murder conviction, holding that appellate counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to argue that the trial court committed fundamental error in givi…
-
Banek v. State, 75 So. 3d 762 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)…nslaughter by act instruction was not erroneous when considered as a whole, and we certified conflict with the First District’s opinion in Montgomery. See Zeigler v. State, 18 So. 3d 1239, 1244-45 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009). However, in Del Valle v. State, 52 So. 3d 16, 18 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010), this court recognized that in Montgomery, “the supreme court effectively overruled this court’s decision in Zeigler.” Thus this court held that appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to argue based on the First District…
-
Curry v. State, 64 So. 3d 152 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011)…el was ineffective in [*154] failing to argue that the then standard jury instruction for manslaughter by act that was given to the jury in his second-degree murder trial constituted fundamental error.1 We agree, and as we did in Del Valle v. State, 52 So. 3d 16, 16 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010), we reverse Curry’s murder conviction, vacate the sentence, and remand for a new trial. After a jury trial Curry was convicted of second-degree murder as charged in the information. The victim was Curry’s girlfriend. She had…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence