Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number

Cary Michael LAMBRIX, Petitioner(s) v. Michael D. CREWS, etc., Respondent(s).

Cary Michael Lambrix, a prisoner under sentence of death, files a petition for writ of habeas corpus. This Court has jurisdiction under article V, section 3(b)(9), Florida Constitution.

In this pleading, Lambrix asserts that he is entitled to relief because the decision in Holland v. Florida, 560 U.S. 631, 130 S.Ct. 2549, 177 L.Ed.2d 130 (2010), announced a new rule of law entitled to retroactive application. We reject this argument. In Holland, the United States Supreme Court held only that equitable tolling could toll the one-year statute of limitations under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA)—it did not address claims proceeding in state court. Holland, 130 S.Ct. at 2554. Moreover, unlike Holland, this case does not involve a situation where counsel failed to timely file a petition for writ of habeas corpus or a motion for postconviction relief. Accordingly, we hereby deny his petition for writ of habeas corpus on the merits. Further, we deny the State's motion to dismiss and Lambrix's motion to consolidate this case with SC10–1845. POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.


QUINCE, J., recused.
Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Lambrix v. Crews
(May 14, 2013)