Opinion
ID #0008013252.
July 26, 2005.
Dear Mr. Martinez:
On July 18, 2005 you filed a motion for postconviction relief alleging (i) ineffective assistance of counsel based upon "neglect by counsel to discover mitigating evidence to support sentencing;" (ii) "cruel and unusual punishment in sentencing outside of guide lines;" and (iii) the court's failure to fully explain the ramifications of the sentence. You also argue that the cumulative effort of these allegations warrant relief.
On April 9, 2001, you entered guilty pleas to Escape After Conviction, Felony Theft, Failure to Stop at the Command of a Police Officer and Reckless Driving. There was a sentencing recommendation by the State and defense of four years at Level 5, followed by Level 4 home confinement, followed by Level 3 probation. That recommendation was found to be reasonable and imposed.
You recognized your problem of filing after the time allowed in Rule 61(I)1 of three years and have attempted to argue you should be permitted to proceed in the interest of fairness.
I find that your present motion is time barred as it comes on four years from your sentence. It contains nothing that could not have been raised earlier. Rule 61(I)(5) provides you no relief. The claim is procedurally barred.