Grimes v. Ashley

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Grimes v. Ashley

113 So. 3d 1026, 2013 WL 2234014, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8156

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 22, 2013

DocketNo. 1D12-3559

StatusPublished

This text of 113 So. 3d 1026 (Grimes v. Ashley) 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

Grimes v. Ashley, 113 So. 3d 1026, 2013 WL 2234014, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8156 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Pincite

Opinion

THOMAS, J.

Appellant appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of mandamus seeking removal of a detainer. The trial court failed to address Appellant’s argument that the charges that formed the basis of the de-tainer were barred by the expiration of the statute of limitations. As we must consider Appellant’s allegations in his petition as true, Appellant has sufficiently alleged a basis for removal of the detainer, and the trial court should have considered the same. See Jenkins v. State, 957 So.2d 20 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Perkins v. State, 766 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).

Accordingly, we reverse the appealed order and remand with directions to the lower court to expeditiously issue an order to the Okaloosa County Sheriffs Office to show cause why mandamus should not be granted and the detainer removed.

[1027]*1027REVERSED and REMANDED with directions.

BENTON, C.J., and CLARK, J„ concur.

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

THOMAS, J.

Appellant appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of mandamus seeking removal of a detainer. The trial court failed to address Appellant’s argument that the charges that formed the basis of the de-tainer were barred by the expiration of the statute of limitations. As we must consider Appellant’s allegations in his petition as true, Appellant has sufficiently alleged a basis for removal of the detainer, and the trial court should have considered the same. See Jenkins v. State, 957 So.2d 20 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007); Perkins v. State, 766 So.2d 1173 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000).

Accordingly, we reverse the appealed order and remand with directions to the lower court to expeditiously issue an order to the Okaloosa County Sheriffs Office to show cause why mandamus should not be granted and the detainer removed.

[1027]*1027REVERSED and REMANDED with directions.

BENTON, C.J., and CLARK, J„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

113 So. 3d 1026, 2013 WL 2234014, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8156, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grimes-v-ashley-fladistctapp-2013.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack