Hamilton v. State

The Supreme Court affirmed the circuit court’s orders denying Appellant’s successive motion for postconviction relief, filed under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.851, and denying his demands for additional public records, filed under Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.852. The court held (1) because Appellant’s successive motion was filed after the expiration of the relevant one-year time limitation and none of the exceptions to the one-year time limitation in Rule 3.851(d)(2) were applicable to the claims raised by Appellant in his successive postconviction motion, the postconviction court properly denied the successive motion as untimely; and (2) there was no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s denial of Appellant’s requests for additional public records. View "Hamilton v. State" on Justia Law