Bernard Gyden v. State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledJuly 8, 2026
Docket3D2025-0185
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed July 8, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D25-0185
Lower Tribunal No. F09-40014
________________
Bernard Gyden,
Appellant,
vs.
State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Laura Anne
Stuzin, Judge.
Bernard E. Gyden, in proper person.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Kayla H. McNab, Assistant
Attorney General, for appellee.
Before LOGUE, LINDSEY, and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Defendant, Bernard Gyden, appeals the trial court’s denial of his
petition for habeas corpus. We decline to consider Defendant’s Petition as
a motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal
Procedure 3.800 because Defendant is not alleging a sentencing error or
miscalculation. Rather, Defendant is attacking the legality of the crimes to
which he was convicted.
Pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, this motion
should have been filed no more than two (2) years after the judgement and
sentence became final. This two-year time limitation for post-conviction
motions cannot be circumvented by the filing of a petition for writ of habeas
corpus. See Jamison v State, 73 So. 3d 317, 318 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011);
Collins v. State, 859 So. 2d 1244, 1257 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). The two-year
period ran from March 10, 2016 (30 days after the Third District Court of
Appeal affirmed the appeal), to March 10, 2018.
Second, courts have agreed that habeas corpus proceedings may not
be used to provide the petitioner with an additional appeal regarding issues
or claims that could have, or were, raised on appeal or in a 3.850 motion.
See Hunter v State, 817 So. 2d 786, 798 (Fla. 2002); Collins, 859 So. at
1246. In this case, the motion is not only time-barred, but it can also be
deemed as successive under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(o).
2
The issues raised in the Petition have already been previously addressed,
specifically in the Defendant’s initial appeal.
Affirmed.
3