Bautista v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bautista v. State

164 So. 3d 1253, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 8564, 2015 WL 3511001

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 5, 2015

DocketNo. 5D14-4441

StatusPublished

This text of 164 So. 3d 1253 (Bautista v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bautista v. State, 164 So. 3d 1253, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 8564, 2015 WL 3511001 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, Candace Bautista, has filed a petition for writ of certiorari requesting review of the trial court’s order denying her motion to mitigate or reduce sentence. The trial court denied the motion, concluding that it was filed after sixty days from the date of sentence and that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the motion. However, Bautista appealed her sentence and this court affirmed, issuing its mandate on September 16, 2014. Bautista filed her motion within sixty days of that date. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) provides that the court may reduce or modify a sentence pursuant to a motion filed within sixty days after receipt of the mandate issued by the appellate court. The State concedes that the motion was timely filed under the rule and that the case should be remanded so the trial court can consider the motion on the merits. Accordingly, we grant the petition for certiorari, issue the writ, vacate the order under review, arid remand this case to the trial court.

PETITION GRANTED; ORDER VACATED; REMANDED.

SAWAYA, PALMER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, Candace Bautista, has filed a petition for writ of certiorari requesting review of the trial court’s order denying her motion to mitigate or reduce sentence. The trial court denied the motion, concluding that it was filed after sixty days from the date of sentence and that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the motion. However, Bautista appealed her sentence and this court affirmed, issuing its mandate on September 16, 2014. Bautista filed her motion within sixty days of that date. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) provides that the court may reduce or modify a sentence pursuant to a motion filed within sixty days after receipt of the mandate issued by the appellate court. The State concedes that the motion was timely filed under the rule and that the case should be remanded so the trial court can consider the motion on the merits. Accordingly, we grant the petition for certiorari, issue the writ, vacate the order under review, arid remand this case to the trial court.

PETITION GRANTED; ORDER VACATED; REMANDED.

SAWAYA, PALMER and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 So. 3d 1253, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 8564, 2015 WL 3511001, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bautista-v-state-fladistctapp-2015.