Fredrick Lane v. State of Florida
This text of Fredrick Lane v. State of Florida (Fredrick Lane v. State of Florida) 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.
Opinion
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA
FREDRICK LANE, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND Petitioner, DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
v. CASE NO. 1D15-4894
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent. ___________________________/
Opinion filed January 12, 2016.
Petition for Writ of Mandamus -- Original Jurisdiction.
Fredrick Lane, pro se, Petitioner.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Trisha Meggs Pate, Bureau Chief, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
This petition for writ of mandamus seeks to compel a ruling on a motion for
postconviction relief. Because the circuit court has recently issued an order striking
one ground of the motion with leave to amend, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Munn v. Florida Parole Commission, 807 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
(holding that where the trial court has recently taken action, mandamus relief was not
warranted). However, we encourage the circuit court to continue its efforts to
expeditiously dispose of the motion pending below. See Wilson v. State, 775 So. 2d
1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
THOMAS, SWANSON, and MAKAR, JJ., CONCUR.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Fredrick Lane v. State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/fredrick-lane-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2016.