PAOLA ANDREA RESTREPO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 2012-04-13
No. 2D11-4623
CASANUEVA, LaROSE, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
86 So. 3d 538 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (2012) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Paola Andrea Restrepo appeals the summary denial of her motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, which the post-conviction court denied as untimely. We affirm. See Barrios-Cruz v. State, 63 So.3d 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). As in Barrios-Cruz, 63 So.3d at 870, we hold that Padilla v. Kentucky, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), does not apply retroactively in postconviction proceedings, and we certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question of great public importance pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(a)(2)(A)(v):

SHOULD THE RULING IN Padilla v. Kentucky, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), BE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY IN POSTCONVICTION PROCEEDINGS?

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA, LaROSE, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Richards v. State, 140 So. 3d 1158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
    …ove for mistrial is to ‘save’ a losing case.” Rutherford, 545 So. 2d at 855. The prosecutor had no need to “save” a losing case in this instance as the mistrial was granted during the testimony of the very first witness at trial. See State v. Tyson, 86 So. 3d 538, 541 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (holding that there was no indication that the prosecutor was goading the defense into seeking a mistrial where the comments that resulted in a mistrial were made during opening statements and no evidence had been presented).…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw