CHARLES E. CARMEN, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed dismissal of Carmen's Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief petition filed in the trial court, holding that the trial court had jurisdiction to consider claims challenging the propriety of original proceedings.
A trial court has jurisdiction under Rule 3.850 CrPR to consider post-conviction relief petitions challenging the propriety of original proceedings, and such petitions must be filed in the county of trial rather than the county of incarceration.
[1] Under Rule 3.850 CrPR, post-conviction relief petitions challenging the propriety of original proceedings must be filed and determined in the county of trial, and the tri…
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 intelligenceCarmen filed a petition styled as an application for writ of habeas corpus in the trial court where he was convicted, invoking Rule 3.850 CrPR for pos…
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 Right To Counsel In Post-Conviction Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
MANN, Chief Judge.
Carmen’s scatter shot petition filed in the court in which he was convicted is styled an “Application for a Writ of Ha-beas Corpus.” The prayer of the petition on the 7th page thereof plainly refers to Rule 3.850 CrPR, a rule adopted by the Supreme Court of Florida to afford post conviction relief to those who are entitled to it. That rule provides that the questions involved shall be determined by a court in the county of trial rather than in the county of incarceration. See Gideon v. Wainwright, Fla.1963, 153 So. 2d 299; Roy v. Wainwright, Fla.1963, 151 So. 2d 825; Reynolds v. State, Fla.App.2d 1969, 224 So. 2d 769, cert, discharged, Fla.1970, 238 So. 2d 598; Andrews v. State, Fla.App.3d 1964, 160 So. 2d 726; cf. Ruiter v. Wainwright, Fla.App.2d 1971, 249 So. 2d 67; State ex rel. Wainwright v. Holley, Fla.App.2d 1970, 234 So. 2d 409. The crucial allegations are those which relate to the propriety of the original proceedings, not to any conduct on the part of the officials of the correctional system. Consequently, Carmen filed his petition in the correct court and it was improperly denied on a finding that the court was without jurisdiction. We express no opinion on the merits of the petition. In fact, it would be advisable if prior to its reconsideration Carmen were afforded the advice and assistance of counsel who have assisted him in this appeal.
Reversed and remanded.
HOBSON and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Leichtman v. Singletary, 674 So. 2d 889 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…So. 2d at 110. As appellant takes issue with the voluntariness of his plea, a matter which attacks the merits of conviction, Martin county was without authority to review this matter by writ of habeas corpus. See Sandstrom; see also Carmen v. State, 300 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). Furthermore, both bases for relief raised by appellant, the voluntariness of his plea and the legality of his sentence, are the issues that should be raised by a motion for post-conviction relief, not by petition for ha-beas cor…
-
Barnes v. Crosby, 909 So. 2d 534 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…taking of polygraph examinations was not a condition of his probation. Because Barnes was attacking the validity of the proceedings in the Tenth Judicial Circuit Court, jurisdiction to entertain the petition lay with that court. See Carmen v. State, 300 So. 2d 713, 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974); Collins v. State, 859 So. 2d 1244, 1245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Nevertheless, Barnes is not entitled to ha-beas relief. A petition for writ of habeas corpus cannot be used as a substitute for an appropriate postconviction mot…
-
LeBLANC v. State, 636 So. 2d 198 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)…[*199] PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Mills v. Dugger, 559 So. 2d 578 (Fla.1990); Carmen v. State, 300 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974). PETERSON, DIAMANTIS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Jetson ROY v. Louie L. Wainwright, 151 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 1963)
- Gideon v. Louie L. Wainwright, 153 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 1963)
- State v. Madison Lee Reynolds, 238 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 1970)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Louie L. Wainwright v. Holley, 234 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970)
- Madison Lee Reynolds v. State, 224 So. 2d 769 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)
- Andrews v. State, 160 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Ruiter v. Louie L. Wainwright, 249 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)
- Fla. Peach Corp. v. Barron, 249 So. 2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)