JOHN R. DUNCAN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 alleged errors in illegal seizure and search, not raised on direct appeal, do not constitute grounds for post-conviction relief unless they violate due process.
Petitioner sought post-conviction relief alleging illegal seizure and search, with the illegally obtained property used as evidence against him. He wa…
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 Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1 cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, seeking post-conviction relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix alleged that he, “was seized and searched illegally without a warrant * * * ” and that, “property thus illegally obtained was produced in evidence against your petitioner, legal ownership of said property having never been ascertained and was a determining factor in your petitioner’s conviction.”
The trial judge found that any errors complained of in the petition were such errors as should have been called to the attention of the trial court and asserted by appeal. He further found that none of the errors complained of amounted to violations of due process of law and none of them were of the character that would support a collateral attack on the judgments of conviction.
*719It should be noted that the record reveals that the petitioner was represented by counsel of his choice at the trial upon the criminal charge of which he was found guilty.
Affirmed upon authority of the rule stated in Donovan v. United States, 205 F.2d 557 (10th Cir. 1953) ; United States v. Scales, 249 F.2d 368 (7th Cir. 1957).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Marti v. State, 163 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)…egations relating to the legality of his arrest and detention, and the length of time before he went to trial, failed to show in what manner these allegations, even if true, would have deprived him of a fair trial. See Duncan v. State, Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 718 [opinion filed March 17, 1964], Further, the federal courts have repeatedly held that these questions cannot be raised in a proceeding for vacation of sentence under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (the model for Criminal Procedure Rule 1). See Roddy v. United S…
-
Joseph v. State, 447 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…485 (Fla.1966); Ziegler v. State, 180 So. 2d 477 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); Coyner v. State, 177 So. 2d 715, 717 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); Chayter v. State, 176 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965); Kirkland v. State, 165 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964); Duncan v. State, 161 So. 2d 718 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964); Austin v. State, 160 So. 2d 730, 732-33 (Fla. 2d DCA), appeal dismissed, 164 So. 2d 579 (Fla.1964).…
-
Laures James Dozier v. State, 192 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)…state. First, appellant argues that he was arrested without a warrant, violating his constitutional rights. Even if true, this cannot be properly considered in a post-conviction attack on his judgment and sentence. See Duncan v. State, Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 718 and Smith v. State, Fla.App.1964, 168 So. 2d 585. Appellant alleges also that he was interrogated without the presence of counsel and that his request for counsel was denied. Assuming such allegations can properly be raised in a collateral attack…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The United States v. Waddell Scales, 249 F.2d 368 (7th Cir. 1957)
- Donovan v. United States, 205 F.2d 557 (10th Cir. 1953)