Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1979

Adams v. Wainwright

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided December 13, 1979 · Mills, Smith, Wentworth

381 So. 2d 248; 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 6983 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Hart v. Turner (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)
Steppe v. Wainwright (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us upon a petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner alleges ineffective assistance of counsel and that he was not allowed to withdraw a coerced guilty plea.

Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 provides a means of relief whereby such issues may be addressed. Petitioner’s failure to assert exhaustion of this remedy precludes habeas relief. Henderson v. State, 184 So.2d 646 (Fla. 1966); Zuniga v. State, 184 So.2d 659 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966), cert. denied, 189 So.2d 635 (Fla. 1966), cert denied, 385 U.S. 962, 87 S.Ct. 404, 17 L.Ed.2d 307 (1966); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850.

Accordingly, said petition is denied.

MILLS, C. J., and LARRY G. SMITH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

070rehearing

*249ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

This cause is before us upon petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner raises issues which were previously addressed by means of a Fla.R.Crim.P. 1.850 (now 3.850) motion for post-conviction relief. The trial court denied the motion and petitioner has failed to show a timely pursuit of appellate remedies under the Rule on those grounds; relief by habeas corpus is thus precluded. Stewart v. Wainwright, 206 So.2d 211 (Fla. 1968); Hillhouse v. State, 159 So.2d 228 (Fla. 1963); Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850.

Accordingly, the petition is denied.

■ MILLS, C. J., and LARRY G. SMITH and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.