Robert Eugene Hendrix v. State of Florida

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a -9- successive postconviction motion may not be used to relitigate claims that were raised and rejected on direct appeal or in prior postconviction proceedings
• “Claims raised and rejected in prior postconviction proceedings are procedurally barred from being relitigated in a successive motion.”
• “Claims raised and rejected in prior postconviction proceedings are procedurally barred from being relitigated in a successive motion.”
• “Claims raised and rejected in prior postconviction proceedings are procedurally barred from being relitigated in a successive motion.” (citing Van Poyck v. State, 116 So. 3d 347, 362 (Fla. 2013))
• “Claims raised and rejected in prior postconviction proceedings are procedurally barred from being relitigated in a successive motion.” (citing Van Poyck v. State, 116 So. 3d 347, 362 (Fla. 2013))
• “Claims raised and rejected in prior postconviction proceedings are procedurally barred from being relitigated in a successive motion.” (citing Van Poyck v. State, 116 So. 3d 347, 362 (Fla. 2013))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).