Anderson v. Singletary, 96-678
Decision Date | 05 March 1997 |
Docket Number | No. 96-678,96-678 |
Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly D601 Kenneth Allen ANDERSON, Petitioner, v. Harry K. SINGLETARY, JR., Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, Respondent. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Kenneth Allen Anderson, Polk City, pro se.
No appearance required for respondent.
Petitioner was convicted in 1979 for burglary, sexual battery, and robbery. We affirmed his conviction in 1981 without opinion. Petitioner then sought post-conviction relief in federal court in 1982, but his petition was denied. 1 In 1987, petitioner sought relief under rule 3.850, which was summarily denied as untimely. In 1991, petitioner filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence under rule 3.800(a), which the trial court denied. On appeal from that denial, we reversed to the extent that the trial court had improperly retained jurisdiction over his sentences. Anderson v. State, 584 So.2d 1127 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). His latest petition raises a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in regard to the 1981 direct appeal of his convictions.
Technically rule 3.850 does not bar petitioner's claim against his appellate counsel on timeliness grounds. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b) (). The 2-year time limit under rule 3.850 does not apply to the present claim because it relates to appellate counsel, which may be raised only by petition for habeas corpus filed in the appellate court. Recently adopted rule of appellate Procedure 9.140(j) addresses the time limits for bringing claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, but it does not begin to run until its effective date. 2 The absence of an express bar date under the present rules does not mean, however, that we must entertain this kind of petition regardless of when it has been first raised.
In Xiques v. Dugger, 571 So.2d 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990), in circumstances similar to the present, the court said:
3
We agree with the second district that laches is properly used in a postconviction relief proceeding when the delay in bringing a claim for collateral relief has been unreasonable and the state has been prejudiced in responding to the claim.
It is apparent to us from the face of this petition that the state has been manifestly prejudiced. Here, petitioner does not state why or how he delayed in raising his claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel until now. He has made no showing of being thwarted by conduct of counsel or the state in bringing such a claim; nor has sought to show that some fact or circumstance precluded him from being reasonably charged with knowledge of any alleged failing by...
To continue reading
Request your trial- Decius v. Decius
-
McCray v. State
...claim for collateral relief has been unreasonable and the state has been prejudiced in responding to the claim." Anderson v. Singletary, 688 So.2d 462, 463 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997). See also Xiques v. Dugger, 571 So.2d 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990); Smith v. Wainwright, 425 So.2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982); ......
-
Brown v. State, 98-687
...no case in which the doctrine of laches was applied in a case involving such a short a period of time. Compare Anderson v. Singletary, 688 So.2d 462 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997) (laches applied where petition was filed 15 years after appeal concluded); Xiques v. Dugger, 571 So.2d 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990......
-
Russell v. State, 98-1870
...General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Wright v. State, 711 So.2d 66 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Anderson v. Singletary, 688 So.2d 462 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997); State v. Caudle, 504 So.2d 419, 421-23 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Bashlor v. Wainwight, 374 So.2d 546 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); W......