LARRY VINCENT GYSIN, 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 the trial judge did not err in denying the appellant's second petition for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1.
The appellant was convicted of a crime, appealed, and had his appeal affirmed. He then filed two petitions for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No…
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 was informed against in the Criminal Court of Record in and for Dade County, Florida, charged with the violation of certain statutes of this State. He employed counsel of his own choosing, demanded a jury trial, was tried by a jury of his peers, and convicted. Judgment and Sentence accordingly. Thereafter, with his private counsel he prosecuted an appeal to this court which reviewed the matter and affirmed the action of the trial court. See: Gysin v. State, Fla.App.1963, 151 So.2d 349. The appellant filed a petition seeking relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S. A. ch. 924 Appendix, which relief was denied. Subsequently he filed a second petition for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, which relief was denied and the trial judge made the following finding:
******
“* * * the Movant was able to employ counsel for the proceedings of this-cause and that the Court has already denied a previous Motion for Relief under Criminal Procedure Rule 1, filed by the Defendant in this cause upon similar grounds.”
******
This order has now been brought on for review by the appellant in proper person. He was tendered the services of counsel to be paid by the State of Florida, which he declined and elected to prosecute this appeal in proper person.
We find no error in the order under review. The second petition sought relief upon the same grounds urged in the first. Coleman v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 714; Cameron v. State, Fla.App.1967, 196 So.2d 182; Wells v. State, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 20. And, even if the court had a right to proceed under the second petition and the contents thereof were taken as true, the grounds urged were not sufficient for a collateral attack on the verdict, judgment and sentence. See: Marti v. State, Fla. App. 1964, 163 So.2d 506; Gilliard v. State, Fla.App.1965, 171 So.2d 902; Hall v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 277; Whitney v. State, Fla.App.1966, 184 So.2d 207.
Therefore, for the reasons above stated, the order here under review is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. State, 300 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)…PER CURIAM. Order affirmed. Simpson v. State, Fla. App.2d 1964, 165 So. 2d 195; Gysin v. State, Fla.App.3rd, 1968, 205 So. 2d 542; Sparks v. State, Fla.App.4th 1972, 262 So. 2d 251. HOBSON, Acting C. J., and McNULTY and GRIMES, JJ., concur.…
-
Dotson v. State, 299 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)…PER CURIAM. Oral argument has been dispensed with pursuant to Rule 3.10(e), Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A. The order appealed is affirmed on authority of Simpson v. State, Fla.App.2d 1964, 165 So. 2d 195; Gysin v. State, Fla. App.3rd 1968, 205 So. 2d 542; Thomas v. State, Fla.App.2d 1970, 234 So. 2d 715; and Sparks v. State, Fla.App.4th 1972, 262 So. 2d 251. MANN, C. J., and HOBSON and GRIMES, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Whitney v. State, 184 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Marti v. State, 163 So. 2d 506 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Rossie D. Coleman v. State, 183 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966)
- Hall v. State, 183 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Gilliard v. State, 171 So. 2d 902 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)
- Cameron v. State, 196 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)
- Larry v. Gysin and Bruce Hinson Gammage, 151 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Wells v. State, 197 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)