JOSEPH SCOTT, PETITIONER,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Florida appellate court denied habeas corpus petition where petitioner sought to relitigate ineffective assistance of counsel claims already raised in a successive and untimely Rule 3.850 motion.
Habeas corpus cannot be used to circumvent the two-year filing deadline for Rule 3.850 postconviction motions or to raise successive claims.
[1] Habeas corpus may not be used to file successive Rule 3.850 motions or to circumvent the two-year filing deadline applicable to postconviction relief petitions.
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 intelligenceScott was convicted and sentenced in May 2014, granted a first postconviction motion and resentenced, then filed a second postconviction motion in Oct…
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 Successive Petitions cases and more on FLexlaw
By petition for writ of habeas corpus Joseph Scott seeks a new trial, or a new evidentiary hearing on his 2016 petition filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, or alternatively, a new appeal from his original judgment and sentence. We deny the writ.
Scott was originally convicted and sentenced in May 2014. Scott’s first postcon-viction motion was granted, and he was resentenced accordingly. He filed a second Motion for Post-Conviction Relief on October 13, 2016, claiming ineffective assistance of his counsel when he took the original May 2014 plea. The trial court denied the petition as it was filed two years, four months, , and two weeks after the judgment and sentence were filed, beyond the two-year time limit set forth in Rule 3.850. He has now filed a third post-conviction petition styled as a petition for habeas corpus, alleging the same previously raised claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. Habeas corpus may not be used to file successive 3.850 motions or to raise issues which would be untimely if considered as a motion for postconviction relief under rule 3.850. See Baker v. State, 878 So.2d 1236, 1245-46 (Fla. 2004),
We therefore deny the petition as successive and untimely filed. .