TISDOL v. STATE (2026)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Byron J. TISDOL, etc., Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 3D26-0695

Decided: August 20, 2026

Before SCALES, C.J., and MILLER and GOODEN, JJ.

Ripley Law, PLLC, and Dan Ripley (Pinellas Park), for petitioner. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Daihana Chang, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Petition denied. See Tisdol v. State, 878 So. 2d 428 (Fla. 3d DCA 2004), review dismissed, SC04-1811 (Fla. Sept. 17, 2004); Baker v. State, 878 So. 2d 1236, 1242 (Fla. 2004) (“[W]ith limited exceptions, habeas corpus relief is not available to obtain collateral postconviction relief because most claims can be raised by motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.”); Mills v. Dugger, 559 So. 2d 578, 579 (Fla. 1990) (“Habeas corpus is not to be used for additional appeals of issues that could have been, should have been, or were raised on appeal or in other postconviction motions.”); see also Parker v. State, 873 So. 2d 270, 278 (Fla. 2004) (“[T]he law of the case doctrine is narrower in application in that it bars consideration only of those legal issues that were actually considered and decided in a former appeal ․” (quoting Fla. Dep't of Transp. v. Juliano, 801 So. 2d 101, 107 (Fla. 2001))).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network