Full text
Price v. State

Loading…
Opinion
692 So. 2d 971 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 25, 1997
Full text
Price v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 5, 2018
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 1, 2012
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 7, 2011
Supreme Court of Florida · May 15, 2003
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Apr 30, 2003
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 26, 2002
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 1, 2002
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Sep 5, 2001
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 31, 2001
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 19, 2001
Supreme Court of Florida · Nov 16, 2000
Parentheticals
holding defendant is not entitled to successive review of "a specific issue" which has already been decided against him
noting that rule 3.800 "contains no proscription against the filing of successive motions" but that "a defendant is not entitled to successive review of a specific issue which has already been decided against him"
noting that “a defendant is not entitled to successive review of a specific issue which has already been decided against him”
holding defendant is not entitled to successive review under rule 3.800 of “a specific issue” which has already been decided against him
confirming that successive review of issues raised in 3.800 motions is not authorized
noting that rule 3.800 "contains no proscription against the filing of successive motions” but that "a defendant is not entitled to successive review of a specific issue which has already been decided against him ”
noting that rule 3.800 “contains no proscription against the filing of successive motions” but that “a defendant is not entitled to successive review of a specific issue which has already been decided against him”
defendant is not entitled to repetitive review of specific issue which has already been decided against him
“[A] defendant is not entitled to successive review of a specific issue which has already been decided against him.”
“a defendant is not entitled to successive review of a specific issue which has already been decided against him.”