TOMMIE BAXLEY, 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 held that a motion under Criminal Procedure Rule 1 is not the proper vehicle to raise issues that were or could have been raised on direct appeal.
Appellant filed a motion under Criminal Procedure Rule 1, alleging denial of a fair trial due to jury instructions. This issue had been raised and aff…
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 Rule 1 cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant’s motion filed pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 1, Ch. 924, F.S.A. Appendix was denied by the lower court and this appeal followed.
In the said motion the appellant contended that he was denied a fair trial in that at his trial the trial judge failed to give certain instructions. Following appellant’s trial an appeal was taken by his counsel to this Court and one of the grounds raised there concerned the identical ground which appellant attempts to raise in his Rule 1 motion. In our decision on that appeal reported at 179 So.2d 621 we affirmed appellant’s judgment of conviction.
The matter appellant seeks to have reviewed by Rule 1 motion is one which must be raised by timely appeal from judgment of conviction rather than by collateral attack. This matter having been the subject of a direct appeal, appellant has received the full measure of all constitu*511tional rights to which he is legally entitled. Therefore, the order denying appellant’s Rule 1 motion is hereby affirmed.
WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON and SACK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reuel Lawson v. State, 215 So. 2d 790 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)…e to give, instructions to the jury are matters which may be urged only upon direct appeal from the conviction and are not available as grounds for post-conviction relief. Devlin v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So. 2d 786; Baxley v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So. 2d 510. This appeal was filed by Lawson individually from the State Prison. His court-appointed counsel on the appeal candidly admits the lack of merit herein, for the reason that “the grounds alleged by defendant would be proper under a direct appeal but…
-
Pinkney v. State, 219 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)…e instructions to the jury are not subject to collateral attack and are unacceptable as grounds for post-conviction relief. Lawson v. State, Fla.App. 1968, 215 So. 2d 790; Devlin v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So. 2d 786; Baxley v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So. 2d 510. This alleged error could have properly been raised on direct appeal, but was not. We also note that appellant would not have prevailed had he raised this point in his direct appeal since he failed to request the instruction he now says was erroneo…
-
Stanley v. State, 346 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See: Stanley v. State, 124 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960); Baxley v. State, 192 So. 2d 510 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966); Houser v. United States, 508 F. 2d 509 (8th Cir. 1974).…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Baxley v. State, 179 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)