THOMPSON V. STATE
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida, July Term, A.D. 2008 Opinion filed November 5, 2008. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D07-3302 Lower Tribunal No. 92-37594 ________________ Huntley H. Thompson, Appellant, vs. The State of Florida, Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William Thomas, Judge. Gawane C. Grant, for appellant. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Lunar Claire Alvey, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before GERSTEN, C.J., and RAMIREZ, J., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM. We affirm the trial court s denial of Huntley H. Thompson s petition for writ of habeas corpus. Thompson s claims should have and could have been raised on direct appeal or in a timely filed Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion. Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236, 1241-42 (Fla. 2004); Thomas v. State, 949 So. 2d 319 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). Furthermore, the trial court did not err in denying the petition as a Rule 3.850 motion because Thompson has brought this issue before the trial court and this Court on multiple occasions. As such, it is successive and time-barred. Gamble v. State, 877 So. 2d 706, 720 (Fla. 2004). Finally, Thompson s claim that the prosecution committed a violation under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), by suppressing favorable DNA evidence is facially insufficient. The record reflects that Thompson knew of the evidence allegedly withheld. A Brady claim cannot stand if a defendant knew of the evidence allegedly withheld or had possession of it. Doorbal v. State, 983 So. 2d 464, 480 (Fla. 2008). Thus, habeas relief regarding this issue was properly denied. Affirmed. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
