Childers v. State, 4D00-4408.
| Decision Date | 04 April 2001 |
| Docket Number | No. 4D00-4408.,4D00-4408. |
| Parties | Sterling CHILDERS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Sterling Childers, Madison, pro se.
No appearance required for appellee.
ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
We withdraw our per curiam opinion and substitute the following in its place.
Appellant challenges the trial court's denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. The trial court denied the motion because: (1) defendant's ineffective assistance of counsel claim was simply reraising an issue already addressed on direct appeal; and (2) his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence was an issue that should have been addressed on direct appeal. We affirm. Rule 3.850 does not provide a second chance to raise allegedly reversible error that was argued in the original appeal by re-raising it under the guise of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim. See Freeman v. State, 761 So.2d 1055, 1067 (Fla.2000)
; Vazquez v. State, 653 So.2d 486 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).
Appellant's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence was an issue for direct appeal, and therefore not cognizable under rule 3.850. See Jones v. State, 699 So.2d 809 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
; Williams v. State, 642 So.2d 67 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). The law is clear that where an issue could have been raised on direct appeal, it is not a proper subject for a rule 3.850 motion. See Koon v. Dugger, 619 So.2d 246, 247 (Fla.1993); Armstrong v. State, 429 So.2d 287 (Fla.1983).
Affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jones v. Sec'y
...to raising such claims in postconviction proceedings. Florida courts consistently apply this procedural bar. See Childers v. State, 782 So.2d 946, 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) ("Appellant's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence was an issue for direct appeal, and therefore not cognizable ......
-
Troy v. Sec'y of Dep't of Corr., Case No. 8:11-cv-796-T30-AEP
...state procedural rules preclude Troy from asserting such a claim collaterally in a Rule 3.851 motion. See e.g. Childers v. State, 782 So. 2d 946, 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) ("The law is clear that where an issue could have been raised on direct appeal, it is not the proper subject for a Rule 3......
-
Anderson v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
...firearm could have been raised on direct appeal and is therefore not proper in a motion for postconviction relief. Childers v. State, 782 So. 2d 946, 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) ("Appellant's challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence was an issue for direct appeal, and therefore not cognizab......
-
Cutaia v. Sec'y, CASE NO. 6:10-cv-1170-Orl-31GJK
...claim on direct appeal, Petitioner is precluded from doing so collaterally in a Rule 3.850 motion. See e.g., Childers v. State, 782 So.2d 946, 947 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) (where an issue could have been raised on direct appeal, it is not the proper subject for a Rule 3.850 motion) . The state p......