Francois v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Francois v. State

824 So. 2d 1040, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12764, 2002 WL 2008681

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 4, 2002

DocketNo. 3D01-3251

StatusPublished

This text of 824 So. 2d 1040 (Francois 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

Francois v. State, 824 So. 2d 1040, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12764, 2002 WL 2008681 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Ulrich Francois appeals the denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. Because the trial court order Francois appeals from is not a final appealable order which denies all of the grounds raised in the motion for post-conviction relief, we dismiss the appeal.

In his motion for post-conviction relief, Francois raised three issues, two of which the trial court disposed of in its order of March 16, 2001. The trial court granted an evidentiary hearing as to the remaining issue. An appeal is premature when a trial court’s order does not dispose of an entire rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. See Libertelli v. State, 775 So.2d 339, 340 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

We therefore dismiss the appeal without prejudice to Francois to seek review of the denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief after the trial court disposes of all of the grounds raised in Francois’ motion.

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

PER CURIAM.

Ulrich Francois appeals the denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. Because the trial court order Francois appeals from is not a final appealable order which denies all of the grounds raised in the motion for post-conviction relief, we dismiss the appeal.

In his motion for post-conviction relief, Francois raised three issues, two of which the trial court disposed of in its order of March 16, 2001. The trial court granted an evidentiary hearing as to the remaining issue. An appeal is premature when a trial court’s order does not dispose of an entire rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. See Libertelli v. State, 775 So.2d 339, 340 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).

We therefore dismiss the appeal without prejudice to Francois to seek review of the denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief after the trial court disposes of all of the grounds raised in Francois’ motion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

824 So. 2d 1040, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12764, 2002 WL 2008681, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francois-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack