BERNARD RAMKELAWAN, 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 a habeas corpus petition because the appellant's challenges to his convictions should have been raised on direct appeal or in a timely rule 3.850 postconviction motion, not through habeas corpus.
Habeas corpus is not the proper remedy for raising claims that could have been brought on direct appeal or in a timely rule 3.850 postconviction motion.
[1] Habeas corpus is not available in Florida to obtain collateral postconviction relief available by motion under rule 3.850 or to raise claims that could have been brought…
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 intelligenceBernard Ramkelawan appealed the summary denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging his Broward convictions.…
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 Procedurally Barred Claims cases and more on FLexlaw
Bernard Ramkelawan appeals the summary denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus and its addendum. Although we agree with' the trial court’s ultimate conclusion that the petition warranted denial, we affirm for reasons other than those stated by the court. Robertson v. State, 829 So.2d 901 (Fla.2002). “This longstanding principle of appellate law, sometimes referred to as the ‘tipsy coachman’ doctrine, allows an appellate court to affirm a trial court that ‘reaches the right result, but for the wrong reasons’ so long as ‘there is any basis which would support the judgment in the record.’ ” Id. at 906 (quoting Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Radio Station WQBA, 731 So.2d 638, 644-45 (Fla.1999)). The appellant raised challenges to his Broward convictions that could have been raised on direct appeal or in a timely rule 3.850 postconvietion motion. See Nelson v. State, 43 So.3d 20, 34 (Fla.2010) (recognizing that habeas corpus cannot be used to raise claims that must be brought in a postconviction motion under rule 3.850 or to raise procedurally barred claims of trial court error); Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236, 1245 (Fla.2004) (“The remedy of habeas corpus is not available in Florida to obtain the kind of collateral postconviction relief available by motion in the sentencing court pursuant to rule 3.850.”).
Affirmed.
DAMOORGIAN, C.J., GERBER and CONNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rolling v. State, 218 So. 3d 911 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)
Authorities Cited
- Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 2004)
- Dade Cnty. Sch. Bd. v. Radio Station Wqba, 731 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 1999)
- Swett v. State, 829 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 2002)
- Robertson v. State, 829 So. 2d 901 (Fla. 2002)
- Micah Louis Nelson v. State, 43 So. 3d 20 (Fla. 2010)