Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Baker v. State

Baker v. State

901 So. 2d 405, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 7055, 2005 WL 1130166
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Baker v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 877 So. 2d 856 →
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 16, 2005·No. No. 1D01-4347·Published

Opinion

On The Court’s Oum Motion

PER CURIAM.

We sua sponte withdraw our pre-man-date opinion in this case and substitute the following.

[406]*406The summary denial of the appellant’s postconviction motion is reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court to permit the appellant a reasonable opportunity to demonstrate his claim is timely under Dickey v. State, 30 Fla. L. Weekly D443, —So.2d-, 2005 WL 350313 (Fla. 1st DCA Feb.15, 2005), by alleging the date his present conviction was enhanced by the challenged conviction. Cf. Nelson v. State, 875 So.2d 579 (Fla.2004). If no amendment is filed within the time allowed, then the denial can be with prejudice. Id., Spooner v. State, 889 So.2d 900, 901 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

KAHN, WEBSTER, and HAWKES, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Baker v. State, 901 So. 2d 405, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 7055, 2005 WL 1130166 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

901 So. 2d 405 (Baker v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Nelson v. State
875 So. 2d 579 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2004)
Spooner v. State
889 So. 2d 900 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)