MacArthur v. Moore, 3D99-3163.
Decision Date | 26 April 2000 |
Docket Number | No. 3D99-3163.,3D99-3163. |
Citation | 756 So.2d 232 |
Parties | Theodore MacARTHUR, Petitioner, v. Michael W. MOORE, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al., Respondents. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Theodore MacArthur, in proper person.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Michael J. Neimand, Assistant Attorney General, for respondents.
Before GODERICH, GREEN, and FLETCHER, JJ.
We deny Theodore MacArthur's petition for writ of habeas corpus. The petition is untimely filed beyond the two-year limitation period imposed by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(j)(3)(B), where the petitioner has not alleged under oath with a specific factual basis that he was affirmatively misled about the results of the appeal by counsel.
Barclay v. Singletary, 642 So.2d 583 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (citations omitted). Furthermore, a petition for writ of habeas corpus that is in effect a successive motion for postconviction relief is procedurally barred. See Ali v. State, 729 So.2d 963 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
; Phillips v. Singletary, 728 So.2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); Morejon v. State, 740 So.2d 547 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999); see also Robinson v. State, 707 So.2d 688 (Fla.1998)(defendant who seeks postconviction relief is procedurally barred from raising claims that could or should have been raised on direct appeal) that ; Morejon v. State, 729 So.2d 933 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). See also Calloway v. State, 699 So.2d 849 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) ( ).
The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Allen v. State, 3D05-182.
...P. 9.141(c)(4)(B); Partridge v. Moore, 768 So.2d 1128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000), review denied, 789 So.2d 347 (Fla.2001); MacArthur v. Moore, 756 So.2d 232, 233 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); and/or procedurally barred as successive; and/or have been previously raised and are therefore barred by the doctrin......
- Brown v. State
-
Everett v. State
...relief is procedurally barred from raising claims that he could have raised and should have raised on direct appeal. MacArthur v. Moore, 756 So.2d 232 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000); see also Harvey v. Dugger, 656 So.2d 1253, 1256 (Fla.1995)(postconviction proceedings are not to be used as a second app......