Lewis argues the instant 3.850 motion is not successive because although he raised this issue in a prior motion, the prior motion was denied as untimely; it was not decided on the merits. We agree with defendant that this motion is not barred as successive, but not for the reason appellant argues. Because the alleged breach of plea agreement did not occur until August 13, 2003, appellant's motion is neither...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
