Opinion ID: 1731912
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Procedurally Barred Claims

Text: Claims that could have been raised in prior proceedings are procedurally barred. See Muhammad v. State, 603 So.2d 488, 489 (Fla.1992) (Issues which either were or could have been litigated at trial and upon direct appeal are not cognizable through collateral attack.). Because this is Blanco's fourth postconviction motion  although his first after resentencing  we reject the following claims as procedurally barred: that lingering questions about the crime scene investigation require an evidentiary hearing to reach a final resolution; that the State unlawfully procured the absence of Enrique Gonzalez and Fidel Romero, whom Blanco claims are the actual murderers; that the trial court prevented Blanco from testifying during the second penalty phase; that Blanco was prejudiced by his absence from the courtroom during certain portions of the guilt phase; that the State used false or misleading evidence during the guilt phase; all guilt phase ineffective assistance of counsel claims; issues concerning gunshot residue testing, which were previously raised at trial; a challenge to the reliability of eyewitness testimony during the guilt phase of the trial; and claims that Florida's death penalty and sentencing laws are unconstitutional.