Hobbs v. State

931 So. 2d 212, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 9117, 2006 WL 1565347
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 9, 2006
DocketNo. 1D05-3972
StatusPublished

This text of 931 So. 2d 212 (Hobbs 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
Hobbs v. State, 931 So. 2d 212, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 9117, 2006 WL 1565347 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the trial court’s order dismissing as untimely his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Because appellant filed his 3.850 motion within two years of the Florida Supreme Court’s disposition of his petition for review of this court’s decision on direct appeal, his motion was timely. See, e.g., Cargle v. State, 800 So.2d 698, 699 (Fla. 1st [213]*213DCA 2001); Brown v. State, 617 So.2d 1105, 1106 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993). Accordingly, we REVERSE and REMAND this cause to the trial court for further proceedings.

KAHN, C.J., ERVIN and VAN NORTWICK, JJ„ concur.

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

Related

Brown v. State
617 So. 2d 1105 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Cargle v. State
800 So. 2d 698 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
931 So. 2d 212, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 9117, 2006 WL 1565347, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hobbs-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.