Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2003

Crompton v. State

Crompton v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided March 21, 2003 · Allen, Browning, Webster
842 So. 2d 950; 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 3774; 2003 WL 1387132 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Crompton v. State

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Although the trial court was incorrect to dismiss the appellant’s second postconviction motion on the basis that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the claim therein, we affirm the trial court’s order because the appellant’s second motion was not filed within two years of the date that his judgment and sentence became final, and, despite the appellant’s assertion to the contrary, the facts upon which the present motion is based do not meet the test for newly discovered evidence. See Jones v. State, 709 So.2d 512, 521 (Fla. 1998).

AFFIRMED.

ALLEN, C.J., WEBSTER and BROWNING, JJ. concur.

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