Foster v. State

4 So. 3d 701, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1292, 2009 WL 400377
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Foster v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 14643
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 19, 2009·No. No. 1D08-3496·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By a petition for writ of mandamus, William Foster seeks an order compelling [702]*702the Suwannee County Circuit Court to rule on his motion for postconviction relief. While we recognize that the delay in ruling would appear to be primarily attributable at this point to the state’s requests for extensions of time to file a written response to the motion, the circuit court is nonetheless obligated to rule on the matter before it in a reasonable time. See, e.g., Harris v. State, 914 So.2d 456 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); Wright v. State, 876 So.2d 701 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of mandamus and direct the circuit court to take appropriate action to ensure a prompt ruling on petitioner’s motion.

VAN NORTWICK, PADOVANO, and CLARK, JJ., concur.

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

Foster v. State, 4 So. 3d 701, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 1292, 2009 WL 400377 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

4 So. 3d 701 (Foster v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wright v. State
876 So. 2d 701 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Harris v. State
914 So. 2d 456 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)