Dorsey v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dorsey v. State

764 So. 2d 619, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 316, 2000 WL 36261

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 19, 2000

DocketNo. 98-1428

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 764 So. 2d 619 (Dorsey 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

Dorsey v. State, 764 So. 2d 619, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 316, 2000 WL 36261 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We treat this as a petition for writ of certiorari, see Doss v. Florida Department of Corrections, 730 So.2d 316 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), seeking review of the circuit court’s denial of appellanVpetitioner’s petition for writ of mandamus. We deny the petition, finding no denial of due process and no departure from the essential requirements of the law in the circuit court’s determination that the mandamus petition was untimely. See F.a. R.App. P. 9.100(c). This denial is without prejudice to petitioner asking the Secretary of the Department of Corrections to vacate and re-issue the challenged decision from which petitioner may then timely appeal. See Etienne v. Simco Recycling Corp., 721 So.2d 399 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

STEVENSON, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We treat this as a petition for writ of certiorari, see Doss v. Florida Department of Corrections, 730 So.2d 316 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), seeking review of the circuit court’s denial of appellanVpetitioner’s petition for writ of mandamus. We deny the petition, finding no denial of due process and no departure from the essential requirements of the law in the circuit court’s determination that the mandamus petition was untimely. See F.a. R.App. P. 9.100(c). This denial is without prejudice to petitioner asking the Secretary of the Department of Corrections to vacate and re-issue the challenged decision from which petitioner may then timely appeal. See Etienne v. Simco Recycling Corp., 721 So.2d 399 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).

STEVENSON, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

764 So. 2d 619, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 316, 2000 WL 36261, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dorsey-v-state-fladistctapp-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack