TOMMIE MCCLENNEY JR.
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A successive habeas corpus petition raising claims that should have been presented on direct appeal is procedurally barred and must be dismissed.
[1] A successive habeas corpus petition raising claims that were known or should have been known at the time of a prior petition, or that are cognizable on direct appeal, is…
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 intelligence“Successive habeas corpus petitions seeking the same relief are not permitted nor can new claims be raised in a second petition when the circumstances upon which they are based were known or should have been known at the time the prior petition was filed.”
Johnson v. Singletary, 647 So. 2d 106, 109 (Fla. 1994), cited for the rule barring successive petitions
Tommie McClenney Jr. filed a habeas corpus petition in the Third District Court of Appeal challenging his conviction in case F08-41705. The petition 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 Manifest Injustice Exception cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed July 30, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D25-1224 Lower Tribunal No. F08-41705 ________________
Tommie McClenney Jr., Petitioner,
vs.
The State of Florida, Respondent.
A Case of Original Jurisdiction – Habeas Corpus.
Tommie McClenney Jr., in proper person.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Sandra Lipman, Senior Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
Before MILLER, GORDO, and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2 Dismissed. See Johnson v. Singletary, 647 So. 2d 106, 109 (Fla. 1994) (“Successive habeas corpus petitions seeking the same relief are not permitted nor can new claims be raised in a second petition when the circumstances upon which they are based were known or should have been known at the time the prior petition was filed.”); Dawson v. State, 121 So. 3d 63, 65 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (“Dawson asserts the jury instruction was defective . . . . However, such a claim of judicial error is procedurally barred if not raised on direct appeal.”) (citation omitted); Johnson v. State, 649 So. 2d 948, 948 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (“Appellant’s claim of error in the jury instructions is an issue which is cognizable by direct appeal, not by motion for postconviction relief.”); Beiro v. State, 289 So. 3d 511, 511 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“Although Beiro acknowledges that the instant petition is both successive and untimely, he contends that these procedural bars should be relaxed to correct a manifest injustice. Beiro is incorrect. The mere incantation of the words ‘manifest injustice’ does not make it so.”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Johnson v. Singletary, 647 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 1994)
- Maykel Beiro v. State, 289 So. 3d 511 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)