Court Opinion

ID: 9391855
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-05-03 15:04:03.274985+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:30.188007
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                          Opinion filed May 3, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                              No. 3D23-129
                       Lower Tribunal No. F83-9397
                          ________________

                          Randolph Baggett,
                                  Appellant,

                                     vs.

                         The State of Florida,
                                  Appellee.

      An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from
the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William Altfield, Judge.

     Randolph Baggett, in proper person.

    Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Linda Katz, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ.

     PER CURIAM.
      Affirmed. See Baggett v. Inch, 349 So. 3d 298 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021);

Baggett v. State, 271 So. 3d 1241 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019); Baggett v. State,

150 So. 3d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014); State v. McBride, 848 So. 2d 287, 290-

91 (Fla. 2003) (holding that although res judicata does not prevent a

defendant from filing successive 3.800 motions raising new issues, collateral

estoppel prevents a defendant from relitigating issues previously presented

and decided). See also Franklin v. State, 258 So. 3d 1239, 1241 (Fla. 2018)

(acknowledging that in State v. Michel, 257 So. 3d 3 (Fla. 2018), the Florida

Supreme Court abrogated Atwell v. State, 197 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 2016): “As

we held in Michel, involving a juvenile homicide offender sentenced to life

with the possibility of parole after 25 years, Florida's statutory parole process

fulfills Graham's requirement that juveniles be given a “meaningful

opportunity” to be considered for release during their natural life based upon

“normal parole factors,” [Virginia v.] LeBlanc, 137 S.Ct. [1726,] 1729 (2017),

as it includes initial and subsequent parole reviews based upon

individualized considerations before the Florida Parole Commission that are

subject to judicial review. . . .”)

                                       2