1HE 3dfAcML LDuRT c FLCLIDAroo

-o

r

fehNc ñerC ASÁ NO- SC13 -L 2

S�040<deof ftpf,rk~kSfo6Áed

AMENDE

VRE$DEcTIOWAL 13RLEf 0F PETITIoWER

_hkk%tiçEdòBay Correct$ortat Facility

T recnicus o o en fotos

SEP 172013 ou - aFDR Ã DNG

5300 ß l ne Odve

a n _E7

3240

L

TABLE of CONTEN1'$

t

AGE

TA6LE OF CcNTENT5

TADLE of CETA75cN3 1

PRELEMENAA< 3TATEMENT!

STATEMENT of THE CASE AND FACT5

SUMMARY OR ARGuMENT 2

ARGvMENT 3

E55LIE L 3-9

00£3 THE AffELLATE CouAT5 DERECT AWV EXPR�254ss

OPENEQW,WETH %35dE of .GREAT' PußLEC EMPcRTAWCE

Oui WEEGH PETITZONEÅ RE6Hi TO EMMEûEATERELEASE BY NA6EAS CoHv3 AWû HAV£11/G $U63EC1'

MATTEA JunzsozcTEcd of THE Sv/REME CoVRT

CONCLQ3EÔÑ 9

CERTEFECATE OF JEAq/.EC E

APPENDEx 10

TAßLE Of crrATEon/5

AAGE

ßAGGETT c WA1o/WArGHT,229 502d 239,243(FL A 1%9) 3

.EPPS v. McN EEL, 37 Sc3d 993,92 3

( FLA is+ OcB 2cto) H

IkhbG v. $TATE,59i So2dbl4

FL A 1992 ) 9'

McARIS v. 5TATE, 977 Sold 2G9(FLA stk Ocn 20o7) T'

ÜVARLES v.5TATE, Sbso3d 9'57

( FL A ist DCA 30t I )

.5TAfVG v. STATE, 2 4 Sc 3d %b

( FL A 3rtd Oc A 2co9 ) 5

TORRES v-6TATE,700 Sold 13'17

( FL A Sth Oc A 1997) 4

ZuLünGA v, STATE,DEPT of CC RRS, 32 Sold 679,b77(FLA 15f OCA §D/O)

FLOREDA RulG5 of CREM£WAL ÊßoCEDUR�254

ÑÜLG 3.V5'O 7

FRE 1 D1TMAN srATEMENT¯

onet, Terroniciis o. Dixomy w'it! be rcGereneed in fk 5

br c K6cnet and Respondent c~5 Responde +.The Dcn

tLhe refered a s Ach, Art u derinu U b used

e 5 då erykc s

STATEMEA/T' of THE CAs AWD FAc7

n be L ± of Tc nuc ry, ac the_ srs± acB hA_5 ten _a

expcSS c d rect op n an thc~+ hc cdGirmed ike �040ric

court s dec;s,onJce Appendix A, On thz 2% oF Apr;i; 20i

h6 PehHoøeó febec~6nS rnction En ßc~nc wc~5 deniedeOn

h 1±1½ of My, 2013,the i st Dcr issued hanc ndcde, Jp

e orde 3 ven on Auws�0403(uh soi3,th s vósdidienc

uMMM __9fERGunEWT

Thc First As p on directly nnd expressly is ou

WieShcc by the fvnde entc~l d ctches Swerned by the

.Constitution ;cund,i�040fundc~mentcJly Sc~;lim to Sho«J Hnch

c bcc-s Corøv.s filed wc~.5 not n thc Sovnd jv/ sdichieri

of the covnty We/c Pet/Kc et |3 de+c~;ned,

l'urth<r, the hc~bec~5 corpus Gied by PcN+ioneer is W ¡+k;n

.3dbiccÞ avtchter jurîsdiction c+ this CoVft bect-ose- I f is to

enc c£ed_J_cAsin__c_aa fGc±md_ShWuncons±itukon) Sagradj

�040huS,bein9 o f 3rce-f puht c impor fe~nce directed to th

Florsdc- Supeme Cow+ to re snue its knde~neñ¼l eççeck ve-

e55, TheteFore, tbìS cour+ Sho,Jid 3rcrat jur,sdict cen,

c

hWA/MEWT

EssuE 3

00ES THE APPELL ATE CovRTÁ DTMof MD EXPREs3 OPENEcd TA ES

O F.GR EAT PUBL%c EMP ATAMC£j 001 WEEGA �570ETSIECA/EkÁ R EGH T TV

EMMEûZATE AELEASE BY HABEAS CoAnv3 AND i r G sv87ECT MATTE

vRISDEcTEOW oE THE SUMEME CouRT

TAl SUP20RT

A he~bec-S proceedin9 in . Cour+ ¿s fundnmenhJly umbr e

c ble byJhe cons+t&oñJh constst&om pohibib .ang bad

o f le9ssichion to Fic~nk one icA for æncther so Hnd u -

dide kc~hec~5 relense is kindered,Thus,the F st ocA kc

spic~ced these funcic~nneøfc~) Fc~d3;c+d becc use the

o 9»tten_½hese Sc cks,�040heRNNoner is 5Nil ûnp somhya

the I, s exp r o dche oS Ma.rc ia1s b 2_co3 e te u i

psant Aele d Co_vaty ha zu_cegL bc 6 h 5 e e

o o Count d seatenced Jhe

En i 9 e++ v. Je w;d t , 2 29 so2d1 3L El _L his

o + Nied p9 au

The Supreme cout+, howe e s no�040excl 5ested i th prisdiction_ovechniacc~s poceed

F. 5. Seckcø 79.C), f. 5, A,, conFess similu juris-

d ïc+cen to Circus+ Jud9e s,Neuutke less, F. 5. Sec-H on 79.09,E St A., ûmposes �040kcVEWu£ REQu£A£MÉNT'

thc~Í IA .C@seS_heborC cwCiFCutt jud3C kkW c~ppliC-oution for tk6 adrif 5NALL ߣ FZLÉD Wi'+h +kt Circvet

o f �576kLLos�040q_£n_Mbi_cK±htpKsont/ik,0f gg

nd de~5 not follouied in its opinicA cv5 Shodn by the First DCA,

Thc First Oc A s op nion e cpecssly relies on th6 cosen Icw)

oG Epps v. McWeil, 37 fn3d 923,913( Fic ist ocB 2cio) a d 7d lucoc~

v. .5 FJe, Dept. o f Corrs. 3 2 so 3d 6 N, 6 77 L fia. Ist och 2 olo), and n ot

by Flc s�040ch79.09 Which is for Subjec+ ww+He jurisd cken

fcF habce~5 Pef]+iorer omd ddainees.Toffe4 v. $tc}�254,100

So2d 12'f7(Fic~ 5thDCA1997.1],e, The proper proceduct is tô

pet tion th& Circuit Court in the Second Judicic~l Circuit

fo/ c drit o f hcrbers Corpus, $Inct inc is incarcerched

er ts e à no+ o e urts assump+ am th + e

h e n e e hko w h 5 undc n < LC e is or

ekë c re fer-se

At$o,the Niiny in $t h,29 Jo3d51 Fla. 2 cA zoo

. a lÁ vic t 9o_ un oNce c eypes�540±d ect co )

o NWo eÜ cé~se, l'n $t p3 5(o 9, they julej -

A 5 c indsc~L Mc~�040hr trec~t Jh~ngspt +/enfor W/s�040o} Certiorc~6 c~$ c~- fLkiNon for W/ �040

o f habeas corps becc~use 5tc ny is se kin9 6:simmed ù tem £�2541eAe 1to- Cds ted;y , ßecc~üse_Mc~ngil bee kin9 . hìWæmeNc~½ _ f Clen$e f£p p/isob cJect cñ cun ç~ j le-yd/y ve sçl Gen teuc ir, order£sf ehhon for Wth o·f CerKoto-t| Shoc.J ld be

freded c.5 pe-hkon for Ust of he~bee~5 Corps,Tür&vts to Eb meG�040S,WLnotc tkJ thìS

Coudá jurisdèction to coø5sde/ $b~mys habew

pehtipñ [3 quite lîmite Å, kihi le 3h~rtS uc-5 Ce v c-hd .es  Jeñ½encedä fc+1M ß cc~ch ccMty

edn fy rio± w'sth iA the ½·enitoSc ] j ut_isßct oof thi5 Cofththil Coü&Mvu_th1te35 hz~5_¾ti3-d cklon to revied fine sen_tencin older_b1cauç

c~n3 î4 CvfrenHy cwççiyn ed to the 14c~ielee

Cntre£tsonLEasti_tuhonjadhich_is__w',±hùhe terri+c1M un:sdidion of this coûM rUch_W_CsLe,_ E_b_& 5 c oø?_ 1Lf th&_£LVi endin

Coultklàquig_ i mited lo d6ekke± �040knur+ ±·hc~tîntstee _t» £ de+e£on¯Lorden

&c~5aúEtkodt4UN4diclion fO_Åo 3a oLuike#erM_oldeßs_r_adorilley~L Thclev>< oLBaguiryRWhetherlk&1rdecis go;Lol_pcêtA Hy_iligc-lp:~ncL'[t]hk et vi klæ9 CourtAc~fanL d¡JLhaag e ±ke.Áe±cunee- i G _the Jekèkm

(5 )

orcier à rnerely defecHve,irre3ular, or inso-G-Sicient in form or Subskrnce,"A$ e~ pec~ctice.Jvncdter, *C).7F th6 Chc~llenged defenkoA O(deris] d etermined . fo- hLivuviolchen e4 kht

fikNonerÍ Cons�570ÌfdfioncÅepdfo/canfe6 o de

pocess,±hes_the_tzrder dond-c iculy _k'i lley-l' c~nd not vnere iy d efeckv ey irreSuhr,of insuffic¡ent in fo(M or SQbsf&ncc,

o d in part, pleasLhle for fhis jure'sdichosnr.~l c~ccep+crnce,

furthe/, ihe F?rst DCAs aun edtòre, in Qua.dts_vAc~te,

5b so3d V57 ( Flu Ist OcB act t ) is c~ts0 c~ bc-ses For Ih:s cour+

v/isdickon. In Gvcr/les,+hey ruled-

Tke d e4erm inc~k o n o f Jk ettae d' a, comgic,in f

for the Wri+ oé habec~5 corpus sh~ks n ptt~cle ccvse for le licG_h~kes pic~ce é~+ }-kó

e<~r l ies t s h~½ o S the- proc eed ;rt5 s gth e n +ksfecord Con s sfs af o n ly �040hecompicr|n�040if$e/S,

Tkc Writ of kcrbec~5 Corpv5 is c~-Writ of ingülty

&n å t'5 I55Ú6cÌ ÞV teAf fhe re-Ce5 on5 ofy roonÅS

o f reStrc~s nt crn d d efenken," klhi le the c~dven+c f c~lterneMve, reecdGes,5uch c~s rúle 3.V50,Florida.- R dies c S Cr m;r c~ I frocedure, k c.s cuf-

1 e Å_kkemLewtanfrA gùss_fäc_CrA4cr �040ktevftc~ordincrry Mr;t to c~fte9c~Hon50 f c~ S|Fuc~tian W kere *tke- I c~uJ doe s noOfkerWise provide een cAeguch Mechern smFC ob tc~ n t thef £roca ilLeyLAtte±h'oet

Fks Writ rec~tcün 5 c~Vc icwbie for tht- Fate

Cc-se in Which c~ prìsener kc~5-been go6dedno cedegoc~tt o f effe chve Jc~y to h5t'thle3cd�041fyof his of her 'defenkom' despite.

-- -- L - - - - - ---

t k l procedartS in £ I ~), S'50

The plcrasible c Ile9eho thatppiland senknce. kcus exp;red is

Ívffìce �254nf_fo 3 crMs fr c~ #cec CCJ�254

Gor kc.bec~s Lorpos,

to tJh cd1 3kods Sir Ic~r-5dhSh~nce c 5 & 6c~t the

d Homer was Jeck j thed is, Pe6fic er did not chh c

5 Conv:c±fem or Jenhøce ces regéjited Jo be den

undeF Lilk 335V, é'/c~, R. o Cr:m, Fre,Åut rcdhtt, leNfiomefí

p kom _CIce sme d_ khr~±±e1 imnehc3e alec~5 e- i 5 req uit d

beccrdse Í+ i3 unconStihifioncÅ ænd señÞence he~Å

eyp ted nn March 1sk 200½

Hence,w bcvsic 90c~rc~nke of Florid~ Ic4 is +had

+ke rCSht ._tô a i te£ Jhro<>3 h Jhe ¿Já�040_o_£_hakee± re

d.St be *3rc~n h~hie o f N3 ht; fru l y c~m <l ul thod

Co n_Lb_of_b_ eyI ic fy J_Grwess c re

a ofed hy-_th-e t to hc~hedle I e he

- C^ o 6 Elo 6 an1 he c d hc s

been pc r i e had ed d n ut o Auz

�254øum&rc~kdin Elerid<:~s /JeCic-ec~tsom of Nebts should

be cAcrilcJole to A thro_uS h simple é d direc+ mec n s

W ithout need less comp licc~+ion o r imped i>«en+, c ø d

should be Scr rty c dministered in Pe~var e G justùe cmd

et bound by technicc~lity,

iVot even the howriest precedent t's permathd +c

trio lche the 9 0cac~m hes o F k c~bec~s re l i e f, <egoc~l pro +

ecfion, c~nd et oc~l c~ccess to the coo(+5, or c~ny other

ua dc~c1entc~L rLS_htSL5et-EnthJa_khe_kclwrc~±ion o

N9hts. Ark E, Fim Ce sh 3e�254,hic~c~9 vî Stc~te,,51i so2d GI4

C Fla, 1993%' $hde ve ßvekczar, i9( So Ad 33 ( Fia- 1%6 l( f?oce-

ed sø9 i'n ^H ~hec~s.corpus" is cIvii ec~�040her+kc~m er|msøri n

Achure, even +koo9h seu9h+ in bekc~lG cG one Chcased

of Convicted af æ chme.)j Mort;.s V. 5+c.te, 97(c Soad 259

C Fla. Sth,D c A aootr ) as conf l ìc+ ( 6ecc~use j ur is d icHon

fecfuly liës cely in cu courF With htriforic~!. juásdictiop

over the Sc~cilöy ch Which Morris is bein9 dek~sned cJ l

pleadà$s fi led Wi+h thî s cour+ ind iccas thed Morris 5

e e e c the _Te~yla Cmect o 5 ok

Peug, Act!be

( ( /CLüsTçg

This. Court he s subjed maHet jur sclic o o

c~nf fewed becc~dse fditiamer's pelstion »Jc s he~d in

frofet jur<5dictiornynd,_iLWodict he po! fe'cc~lly incorrec

to veld the 3rec~�040public- impoffe~mce &c pe6kom clullenged

fo/ Petäion etá_ûnen ekeke teiec~seAd t c c,r Nono hie

l'egues t jur sd ickomc~ l e~ccepfcæce.

CERTEFECAr£ of $ERVICE

Ty'ferrçoious D,Di¥pA NERE6Y CerGGy Fkc~f c~·Co y o H

£ckepoing bc~5 h enRn b LI, Sr Mo L lhea pr ser

n£Gc;n I s ±o

Tkt p fcl 7 é t 91-y o nm th s I de o

ep e be ao

arc ous o ×ôc Carteckion F c

90 e lù_re ût i

En/ THE JUPAEME CouRT of Flo4TDA

Tectoni^cv5 O , ()|xnça

fehh'oene/

CASE No, SC(3-f/29

V3

$4 tz nf Fler,rie~

hespoøcI�254îa Þ

AffENQrx

(Ji^×oft v. 5+Je IIV Sc3d 915'l Fla, ist OcA 2ci 3)

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALFIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

TERRONIOUS D. DIXON,

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TOAppellant, FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D12-3418STATE OF FLORIDA,

AppeQçg

Opinion filed January 31, 2013.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County.James B. Fensom, Judge.

Terronious D. Dixon, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela 30 Bondi, Attorney General, and Anne C, Conley, Assistant AttorneyGeneral, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Because appellant's petition for writ of habeas corpus was not filed in the

sentencing court, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to address it. See, eg, Epps v.

_McNeil, 37 So. 3d 923, 923 (Fla. f st DCA 2010); Zuluaga v. State, Dep't of

Corrs., 32 So. 3d 674, 677 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). We affirm the trial court's denial

of the petition on that basis, without prejudice to appellant's right to file a proper

post-conviction motion in the appropriate court.

BENTON, C.J., DAVIS, and ROBERTS, JJ., CONCUR.

2