Bischel v. State

712 So. 2d 432, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6164, 1998 WL 281369
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 3, 1998·No. No. 98-01519·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Michael William Bischel appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion for correction of sentence. We are compelled to dismiss this appeal as untimely.

Instead of timely appealing the trial court’s order denying his motion, Bischel filed a motion for rehearing. Because a motion for rehearing is not authorized by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800, the time for filing a notice of appeal from the original trial court order is not tolled. See Dawson-Knapp v. State, 679 So.2d 1 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Bischel did not appeal the order denying his motion for correction of sentence within thirty days; therefore, he lost his right to appeal the trial court’s order. His notice of appeal filed after the trial court denied his motion for rehearing renders this appeal untimely.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

PARKER, C.J., and FRANK and PATTERSON, JJ„ concur.

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

Bischel v. State, 712 So. 2d 432, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6164, 1998 WL 281369 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

712 So. 2d 432 (Bischel v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Amendments to the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure
886 So. 2d 197 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2004)