Hurt v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hurt v. State

893 So. 2d 601, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 105, 2005 WL 235708

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 13, 2005

DocketNo. 1D04-4382

StatusPublished

This text of 893 So. 2d 601 (Hurt 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

Hurt v. State, 893 So. 2d 601, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 105, 2005 WL 235708 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant seeks review of the trial court’s order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the appellant filed an unauthorized motion for rehearing in the trial court prior to filing the notice of appeal, rendition of the underlying order was not delayed. See Griffis v. State, 593 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Therefore, the notice of appeal, filed August 23, 2004, and seeking review of the trial court’s order of May 11, 2004, was untimely filed. We treat the appellant’s petition for a belated appeal as a response to the previously issued order to show cause and find it to be without merit. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

DISMISSED.

DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK and HAWKES, JJ.,-.concur..,

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant seeks review of the trial court’s order denying his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the appellant filed an unauthorized motion for rehearing in the trial court prior to filing the notice of appeal, rendition of the underlying order was not delayed. See Griffis v. State, 593 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Therefore, the notice of appeal, filed August 23, 2004, and seeking review of the trial court’s order of May 11, 2004, was untimely filed. We treat the appellant’s petition for a belated appeal as a response to the previously issued order to show cause and find it to be without merit. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

DISMISSED.

DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK and HAWKES, JJ.,-.concur..,

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

893 So. 2d 601, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 105, 2005 WL 235708, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hurt-v-state-fladistctapp-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack