Bischel v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bischel v. State

712 So. 2d 432, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6164, 1998 WL 281369

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 3, 1998

DocketNo. 98-01519

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 712 So. 2d 432 (Bischel 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

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

Pincite

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

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

712 So. 2d 432, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 6164, 1998 WL 281369, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bischel-v-state-fladistctapp-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack