Florida Statutes
Fla. Stat. § 79.10 (2025)
Effect of judgment.
✓ 2025 Florida Statutes — current through the 2025 Regular Session
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
FL-LEGleg.state.fl.us
JustiaFla. Statutes
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
79.10 Effect of judgment.—The judgment is conclusive until reversed and no person remanded by the judgment while it continues in force shall be at liberty to obtain another habeas corpus for the same cause or by any other proceeding bring the same matter again in question except by an appeal or by action of false imprisonment; nor shall any person who is discharged from confinement by the judgment be afterward confined or imprisoned for the same cause except by order of a court of competent jurisdiction.
History.—s. 9, Sept. 16, 1822; s. 9, ch. 3129, 1879; RS 1779; GS 2256; RGS 3579; CGL 5443; s. 29, ch. 67-254.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6
cases, 1955–2011 · leading case: Buss v. Reichman, 53 So. 3d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011).
Buss v. Reichman, 53 So. 3d 339 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011). “Res Judicata Even before the enactment of rule 1, successive habeas corpus petitions were prohibited. “The rule in this State is that denial of application for habeas corpus precludes a subsequent application for ha-beas corpus in the same cause on the same facts and issues.”
State Ex Rel. Scaldeferri v. Sandstrom, 285 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 1973). “Inasmuch as the district court proceeding was a "judgment" by virtue of its dismissal on the merits (albeit without prejudice to proceed in the circuit court), it follows that the form of the petition filed here as a second petition for "habeas corpus" cannot be entertained as…”
State ex rel. Miller v. Kelly, 88 So. 2d 118 (Fla. 1956). “Section 79.10, F.S.19SS, F.S.A., provides a judgment in habeas corpus “shall be conclusive until reversed in the manner hereinafter provided for, and no person remanded by such judgment while the same continues in force shall be at liberty to obtain another habeas corpus for the…”
Moat v. Mayo, 82 So. 2d 591 (Fla. 1955). “Section 79.10, F.S.1951, F.S.A.; Pope v. Mayo, Fla.”
Graziano v. State, 305 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). “See § 79.10 Fla.Stat, F.S.A.; State ex rel. Miller v.”
Powers v. Schwartz, 357 So. 2d 764 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). “Our review leads us to the conclusion that petitioner’s original petition for writ of habeas corpus and her supplemental petition for writ of habeas corpus are substantially identical. Based upon this conclusion we hold that the defense of res adjudicata is established by the…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.