EARTON DAVID JONES, PETITIONER,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF CORRECTIONS, RESPONDENT

Fla. | 1971-09-08
No. 41242
ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
252 So. 2d 570 Florida Supreme Court (1971) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case


Opinion of the Court
DEKLE, Justice.

DEKLE, Justice.

This cause is before us on petition for writ of habeas corpus filed in this Court on June 16, 1971, and response thereto filed July 12, 1971. Fla.Const. art. V, § 4(2), F.S.A.

*571The basis asserted for the petition is that defendant was not represented by counsel at a preliminary hearing. This issue was presented to the Third District Court of Appeal and was decided adversely to the petitioner. Jones v. State, 248 So.2d 517 (3d DCA Fla. 1971). This Court will not reconsider on a petition for writ of habeas corpus those issues already considered and determined by another appellate court. Tafero v. State, 242 So.2d 470 (3d DCA Fla.1971); Carter v. State, 242 So.2d 737 (1st DCA Fla.1970); Hollingshead v. Wainwright, 194 So.2d 577 (Fla.1967); Roberts v. State, 242 So.2d 191 (3d DCA Fla.1970). As between the state and this defendant, those issues already disposed of are res judicata in a collateral proceeding such as habeas corpus or under Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850, 33 F.S.A. Neither is there a basis here for conflict certiorari.

Accordingly, the writ of habeas corpus should be and the same is hereby discharged.

It is so ordered.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS and McCAIN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw