MICHAEL GISI, 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.
Michael Gisi appealed the denial of his habeas corpus petition challenging a defect in the information for one of his convictions—specifically, a variance in the offense date between the information and verdict form. The Fifth District Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal due to lack of jurisdiction, finding that habeas petitions attacking the validity of convictions must be brought in the circuit court that rendered the conviction, not the court of the county where the defendant is incarcerated.
The circuit court of the county where a defendant is incarcerated lacks jurisdiction to consider a habeas petition attacking the validity of a conviction. Such petitions must be brought in the circuit court of the county that rendered the judgment of conviction.
[1] A circuit court in the county of incarceration has jurisdiction over a habeas corpus petition concerning the prisoner's incarceration, but not over claims attacking the v…
[2] A habeas corpus petition attacking the validity of a conviction must be brought in the circuit court of the county that rendered the judgment of conviction.
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 intelligence“the date and time is ordinarily not a substantive part of an indictment or information and that there may be a variance between the dates proved at trial and those alleged in the indictment as long as: "(1)the crime was committed before the return date of the indictment; (2) the crime was committed within the applicable statute of limitations; and (3) the defendant has been neither ... surprised nor hampered in preparing his defense."”
Establishes the substantive law regarding date variances in indictments/informations, which the court agreed with but found jurisdictionally improper to apply in this forum.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGisi was convicted in Pinellas County of multiple counts including lewd or lascivious acts upon a minor, handling and fondling a child, interference w…
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 Writ Of Habeas Corpus cases and more on FLexlaw
Michael Gisi appeals the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Gisi’s petition alleged that he is being illegally held due to a defect in the information, which, he contends, precludes one of his convictions. We dismiss this appeal due to a lack of jurisdiction.1
Gisi was tried and convicted in Pinellas County, Florida, of four counts of committing a lewd or lascivious act upon a minor, eight counts of handling and fondling a child, one count of interference with custody and one count of seduction of a child via a computer. The Second District Court of Appeal affirmed Gisi’s convictions and sentences. Gisi v. State, 818 So.2d 510 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). However, after Gisi successfully demonstrated that he received ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, the second district permitted him a new direct appeal on several issues. Gisi v. State, 848 So.2d 1278 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). As a result of his second direct appeal, the second district affirmed some of the counts and reversed others. Count 4, the one at issue in this proceeding, was again affirmed. Gisi v. State, 909 So.2d 531, 532-34 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005).
In his habeas petition filed in Orange County, where Gisi is currently detained, Gisi claims that he is being illegally held *535because the information in Count 4 alleged an offense date of November 22, 1998, but the verdict form listed the offense date as November 21,1998. The circuit court considered Gisi’s petition on the merits and denied relief, concluding that any error on the verdict form was inconsequential because the proof at trial matched the finding of guilt. In reaching this conclusion, the circuit court relied on Coderre v. State, 883 So.2d 385 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), which reiterated that
the date and time is ordinarily not a substantive part of an indictment or information and that there may be a variance between the dates proved at trial and those alleged in the indictment as long as: “(l)the crime was committed before the return date of the indictment; (2) the crime was committed within the applicable statute of limitations; and (3) the defendant has been neither ... surprised nor hampered in preparing his defense.”
Id. at 386 (quoting Tingley v. State, 549 So.2d 649, 651 (Fla.1989)). While we agree with the trial court’s analysis, we conclude that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to consider this claim on the merits.
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 petition involves an issue regarding the prisoner’s incarceration. Johnson v. State, 947 So.2d 1192, 1192-93 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). However, a habeas petition attacking the validity of a conviction and asserting issues related to the trial court proceedings, must be brought in the circuit court of the county that rendered the judgment of conviction. Galloway v. State, 931 So.2d 136, 136-37 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Because Gisi’s petition attacks his conviction, the proper court is the Circuit Court of Pinellas County. For these reasons, we dismiss this appeal.
APPEAL DISMISSED.
TORPY, C.J., and COHEN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Trammell v. State, 369 So. 3d 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024)
-
Jahman Whitfield v. Dep't OF Corr. & State of Fla., 202 So. 3d 116 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)…e, as here, a petition for writ of habe-as corpus attacks the validity of the conviction or issues related to the trial court proceedings, it must be brought in the circuit court of the county that rendered the judgment of conviction. Gisi v. State, 119 So. 3d 534, 535 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (citing Galloway v. State, 931 So. 2d 136, 136-37 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)). Although the trial court applied the wrong rationale when it denied Whitfield’s petition, “[a] conclusion or decision of a trial court will generally b…
-
Alphonso James v. State, 135 So. 3d 375 (Fla. 5th DCA 2014)…ounds that no “complaint” was filed in those cases. As the State correctly argues, because James challenges the validity of his underlying convictions, his petition should have been filed in the Circuit Court of Lee County. See, e.g., Gisi v. State, 119 So. 3d 534, 535 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (“a habeas petition attacking the validity of a conviction and asserting issues related to the trial court proceedings, must be brought in the circuit court of the county that rendered the judgment of conviction”). As such,…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Tingley v. State, 549 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 1989)
- Gisi v. State, 848 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)
- Jahzwah Johnson v. State, 947 So. 2d 1192 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- Gisi v. State, 909 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Galloway v. State, 931 So. 2d 136 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Coderre v. State, 883 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)