From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Orellanes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 8, 2001
790 So. 2d 613 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Opinion

Case No. 3D00-2077

Opinion filed August 8, 2001.

An Appeal under Fla.R.App.P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court of Miami-Dade County, Jerald Bagley, Judge. Lower Tribunal No. 81-10479.

Reinaldo Orellanes, in proper person. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before COPE, SHEVIN, and RAMIREZ, JJ.


Reinaldo Orellanes appeals an order summarily denying his petition for writ of error coram nobis. We affirm.

As we pointed out in State v. Richardson, 785 So.2d 585, 587 n. 2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), the Florida Supreme Court explained in Peart v. State, 756 So.2d 42, 48 (Fla. 2000) that for claims filed on and after May 27, 1999, the defendant should proceed by motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, rather than petition for writ of error coram nobis. The present proceeding was apparently filed in May 2000 and therefore should have been instituted by a 3.850 motion, rather than a petition for writ error coram nobis. We treat the matter as if a 3.850 motion had been filed.

Orellanes entered a guilty plea on July 28, 1981 to charges of carrying a concealed firearm and unlawful possession of cannabis. The trial court withheld adjudication and placed him on probation for eighteen months. Apparently, Immigration and Naturalization Services has recently placed a detainer on Orellanes which seeks his deportation, thus creating the necessity for Orellanes' petition below. The trial court denied the petition because at the time of the plea in this case, there was no requirement that the defendant be advised of the immigration consequences of a guilty plea.

We agree and affirm on the authority of State v. Ginebra, 511 So.2d 960 (Fla. 1987); State v. Paniagua, No. 3D00-2556 (Fla. 3d DCA July 18, 2001); State v. Richardson, 785 So.2d 585 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001); Medina v. State, 711 So.2d 256 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

With respect to the immigration consequences of a plea, Ginebra has been superseded by amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172 for sentences imposed after January 1, 1989. See Peart v. State, 756 So.2d 42 (Fla. 2000); State v. De Abreau, 613 So.2d 453 (1993).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Orellanes v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 8, 2001
790 So. 2d 613 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)
Case details for

Orellanes v. State

Case Details

Full title:REINALDO ORELLANES, Appellant, v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Aug 8, 2001

Citations

790 So. 2d 613 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Citing Cases

Zigta v. Commonwealth

See also United States v. Osiemi, 980 F.2d 344 (5th Cir. 1993);Varela v. Kaiser, 976 F.2d 1357 (10th Cir.…

Rodriguez-Grave v. State

The order is, therefore, affirmed. See Ghanavati v. State, 820 So.2d 989 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002) ("We agree with…