DENNIS ROBERT HUGHES, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a denial of a Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 motion. The motion was correctly denied. See: Clements v. State, 320 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), wherein the following is found:
sfc S}C * ifc * S(!
“ * * * Relief from a judgment of conviction under Rule 3.850 is not proper where the ground raised was presented on appeal or was properly presentable thereon. Reinard v. State, Fla.App.1972, 267 So. 2d 88; Koedatich v. State, Fla. App.1974, 287 So. 2d 738; Jenkins v. State, Fla.App.1972, 267 So. 2d 886.”
* * * * *
The appellant had a full appeal upon his conviction. The issues presented by the 3.850 petition either were or could have been presented in his appeal in chief, which was affirmed in Hughes v. State, 272 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973), cert. denied Fla., 282 So. 2d 877. Therefore, the order under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Matera, 401 So. 2d 1361 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…ra from having such an issue, available to have been litigated at trial, considered on a Rule 3.850 motion thirteen years later. Carillo v. State, 382 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); State v. Gomez, 363 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Hughes v. State, 354 So. 2d 130 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Clements v. State, 320 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Moreover, as the earlier factual recitation of the crime reveals, even if there had been a suggestive show-up of Matera in New York observed by Lamons some months after Lamons…
Authorities Cited
- Clements v. State, 320 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Jenkins v. State, 267 So. 2d 886 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972)
- Koedatich v. State, 287 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
- Reinard v. State, 267 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972)
- State v. Sarasota Cnty., 282 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 1973)
- Heim v. Levine AND Freedman, P. A., 282 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 1973)
- Hughes v. State, 272 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)