“Habeas corpus is not a second appeal and cannot be used to litigate or relitigate issues which could have been, should have been, or were raised on direct appeal.”
How later courts described this case
- “Habeas corpus is not a second appeal and cannot be used to litigate or relitigate issues which could have been, should have been, or were raised on direct appeal.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed August 3, 2022.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-1794
Lower Tribunal No. 21-548-K
________________
Omar Ricardo Brown,
Appellant,
vs.
Lars Severson, etc., et al.,
Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Timothy J.
Koenig, Judge.
Omar Ricardo Brown, in proper person.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Michael W. Mervine, Chief
Assistant Attorney General, for appellee, State of Florida.
Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and MILLER and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Brown v. State, 302 So. 3d 874, 874 (Fla. 3d DCA
2020); Breedlove v. Singletary, 595 So. 2d 8, 10 (Fla. 1992) (“Habeas corpus
is not a second appeal and cannot be used to litigate or relitigate issues
which could have been, should have been, or were raised on direct appeal.”);
Jackson v. State, 1 So. 3d 273, 278 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“Even when a
Fourth Amendment violation has occurred, evidence should be suppressed
only if it ‘has been come at by exploitation of the illegality’ and was not
obtained ‘by means sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of the primary
taint.’” (quoting Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U.S. 471, 488 (1963))).
2