5D05-3571 MitchellScrambling v. State

State: Florida

Court: Florida Fifth District Court

Docket No: 5D05-3571

Case Date: 01/23/2006

Preview:IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT JANUARY TERM 2006 MITCHELL D. SCRAMBLING, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed January 27, 2006 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County, David B. Eddy, Judge. Mitchell D. Scrambling, Sanderson, pro se. No Appearance for Appellee. Case No. 5D05-3571

PALMER, J. Mitchell David Scrambling (defendant) appeals the trial court's order summarily denying his rule 3.850 motion.1 Concluding that the defendant's motion is procedurally barred as being an improper successive motion in violation of rule 3.850(f), we affirm. The defendant has filed two previous rule 3.850 motions. Both were summarily denied by the trial court and said rulings were affirmed by this court. See Scrambling v. State, 897 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Scrambling v. State , 889 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). The claim raised in the defendant's current rule 3.850 motion is one that could have or should have been raised in his first rule 3.850 motion. AFFIRMED. SHARP, W. and TORPY, JJ., concur.
1

See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850.

Download 5D05-3571 MitchellScrambling v. State.pdf