Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Rodriguez v. State, 3D01-1364 (2001)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 3D01-1364 Visitors: 12
Judges: Jorgenson, Goderich and Shevin
Filed: Jul. 25, 2001
Latest Update: Apr. 06, 2017
Summary: 789 So. 2d 548 (2001) Luis C. RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 3D01-1364. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District. July 25, 2001. *549 Luis C. Rodriguez, in proper person. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Regine Monestime, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before JORGENSON, GODERICH and SHEVIN, JJ. PER CURIAM. We affirm the order denying defendant's post-conviction relief motion because, under Saldana v. State, 786 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 3d D
More
789 So. 2d 548 (2001)

Luis C. RODRIGUEZ, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D01-1364.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 25, 2001.

*549 Luis C. Rodriguez, in proper person.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Regine Monestime, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before JORGENSON, GODERICH and SHEVIN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order denying defendant's post-conviction relief motion because, under Saldana v. State, 786 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), an immigration notice that investigation into the possibility of deportation has commenced is insufficient to warrant affording a defendant relief under Peart v. State, 756 So. 2d 42 (Fla.2000). Hence, defendant's motion is insufficient under Peart. Perez v. Moore, 767 So. 2d 1170 (Fla.2000). This affirmance is without prejudice to defendant refiling his post-conviction relief motion if the immigration investigation into deporting him should come to fruition.

Affirmed without prejudice.

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer