NORMAN BEECH, 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 held that an untimely and successive motion for postconviction relief was properly denied, and new issues cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
Appellant sought postconviction relief, alleging mental illness and suicide crisis prevented timely filing. The trial court summarily denied the motio…
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 Raising Issues For The First Time On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
We affirm the trial court’s summary denial of appellant’s untimely and successive motion for postconviction relief. In a document filed in this court, appellant has attempted for the first time to excuse his untimely filing. Appellant alleges that he could not timely challenge his 2002 conviction due to his mental illness and because he was in a suicide crisis unit and under the care of a psychiatrist from 2002 until 2012.
Appellant has improperly attempted to raise this issue for the first time on appeal in this court. If appellant had a valid exception to the two-year time limit, the proper course was to raise that matter with the trial court. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b); Steele v. Kehoe, 747 So.2d 931 (Fla.1999).
We determine that appellant’s claim is not only procedurally improper but without merit as well. Appellant’s allegation that he was unable to timely file a motion is belied by the fact that appellant actually filed a postconviction motion within the time limit and that motion was denied on the merits.
Further, appellant’s arguments in the motion for postconviction relief are without merit. His claim that the procedures for determining competency were not followed because he was examined by only one expert before he entered his plea cannot be raised in a postconviction motion. Nelson v. State, 43 So.3d 20, 33 (Fla.2010); Thompson v. State, 88 So.3d 312, 317 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012).
Affirmed.
GROSS, HAZOURI and CONNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Martinez v. State, 265 So. 3d 690 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- Steele v. Kehoe, 747 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 1999)
- Micah Louis Nelson v. State, 43 So. 3d 20 (Fla. 2010)
- Thompson v. State, 88 So. 3d 312 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)