Case Name: Daniel MANDUJANO-JIMINEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2011-12-09
Citations: 75 So. 3d 821
Docket Number: No. 2D11-1751
Parties: Daniel MANDUJANO-JIMINEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: DAVIS, KELLY, and LaROSE, JJ„ Concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 75
Pages: 821–822

Head Matter:
Daniel MANDUJANO-JIMINEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 2D11-1751.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.
Dec. 9, 2011.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Daniel Mandujano-Jiminez appeals the summary denial of his motion for postcon-viction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm. See Barrios-Cruz v. State, 63 So.3d 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). As in Barrios-Cruz, 63 So.3d at 870, we hold that Padilla v. Kentucky, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), does not apply retroactively in posteonviction proceedings and we certify to the Florida Supreme Court the following question of great pub- lie importance pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.030(a)(2)(A)(v):
SHOULD THE RULING IN Padilla v. Kentucky, — U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 1473, 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010), BE APPLIED RETROACTIVELY IN POSTCONVICTION PROCEEDINGS?
Affirmed.
DAVIS, KELLY, and LaROSE, JJ" Concur.