RANDY DEONARINESINGH, APPELLANT,
v.
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 appellant's petition for writ of error coram nobis challenging his 1997 plea, holding that the motion was untimely under Rule 3.850 and that Padilla v. Kentucky is not retroactive.
A petition for writ of error coram nobis challenging a 1997 plea is properly treated as a motion for postconviction relief under Rule 3.850 and is untimely when not brought within two years as required by State v. Green.
[1] Padilla v. …
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 intelligenceAppellant Deonarinesingh sought to challenge his 1997 plea through a petition for writ of error coram nobis, claiming the trial court failed to advise…
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 Deportation Consequences cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm the order summarily denying appellant’s petition and amended petition for writ of error coram nobis which attempted to challenge his 1997 plea. The circuit court properly treated the petition as a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, which has supplanted the need for the writ of error coram nobis. Wood v. State, 750 So.2d 592, 594-95 (Fla.1999).
*666Appellant’s motion was untimely pursuant to rule 3.850(b). Appellant’s claim that the trial court failed to advise him of deportation consequences was not brought within the two-year window created by State v. Green, 944 So.2d 208 (Fla.2006). Appellant has not demonstrated, as Green requires, how he can conclusively show that the warning was not given. Id. at 218. Appellant has not provided a transcript of the plea colloquy, and the state notes that appellant signed and initialed a plea form which advised of the possibility of deportation. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.172(c)(8).
Padilla v. Kentucky, — U.S.-, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), is not retroactive. Hernandez v. State, 61 So.3d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011), rev. granted, 81 So.3d 414 (Fla.2012); Arellano v. State, 90 So.3d 923, 923-24 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). Further, appellant concedes that he has two federal convictions which may subject him to deportation. Thus, he has not shown that the plea in this case was the sole basis for his deportation. Buton v. State, 995 So.2d 1130, 1132 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008).
Affirmed.
POLEN, Taylor and GERBER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (U.S. 2010)
- Wood v. State, 750 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 1999)
- State v. Owran Green, 944 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 2006)
- Hernandez v. State, 61 So. 3d 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011)
- Gandy v. State, 81 So. 3d 414 (Fla. 2012)
- Bergeron v. State, 995 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- Ehoud Buton v. State, 995 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- Arellano v. State, 90 So. 3d 923 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)