Skip to main content

Muhammad v. State

Citations

  • 603 So. 2d 488
  • 1992 WL 125119

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that postconviction appeal cannot be used where an issue either was raised, or could have been raised, on direct appeal
  • concluding defendant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was “procedurally barred” because “the issue was already raised and rejected on direct appeal”
  • finding claims procedurally barred because “the issue could have or should have been raised on direct appeal.”
  • noting “[i]ssues which either were or could have been litigated at trial and upon direct appeal are not cognizable through collateral attack”
  • finding claims procedurally barred because already raised and rejected on direct appeal
  • “Issues which either were or could have been litigated at trial and upon direct appeal are not cognizable through collateral attack.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Harding

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

18 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.