JIMMIE ERNEST GLOVER
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 change of law established in Erlinger v. United States does not apply retroactively to cases already final on direct appeal.
[1] A change of law established by a United States Supreme Court decision does not apply retroactively to convictions that were final on direct appeal prior to the decision.
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 intelligenceJimmie Ernest Glover filed a rule 3.800 motion in the Circuit Court for St. Lucie County challenging his conviction in a 2014 criminal case. The trial…
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 Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FOURTH DISTRICT
JIMMIE ERNEST GLOVER, Appellant,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.
No. 4D2025-1909
[August 27, 2025]
Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Michael Linn, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2014CF000591 A.
Jimmie Ernest Glover, Blountstown, pro se.
No appearance required for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Wainwright v. State, No. SC2025-0708, 2025 WL 1561151 (Fla. June 3, 2025), cert. denied sub nom. Wainwright v. Florida, No. 24- 7365, 2025 WL 1621505 (U.S. June 9, 2025) (holding that even if Erlinger v. United States, 602 U.S. 821 (2024), constitutes a change of law, it does not apply retroactively).
MAY, CONNER and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.
* * *