Joseph v. State

924 So. 2d 19, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 18792, 2005 WL 3184602
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Joseph v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 835 So. 2d 1221
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 30, 2005·No. No. 3D05-2240·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Livingston Joseph has filed a petition for writ of mandamus and/or motion to enforce mandate. He contends that this court’s mandate in Joseph v. State, 547 So.2d 249 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), was never complied with.

The State’s response demonstrates that on remand from this court’s 1989 decision, the trial court in 1990 complied with the mandate by entering a sentencing guidelines departure order on count two, and vacating count three. Further, the petitioner has previously raised the claim that the trial court failed to comply with this court’s mandate, and relief has been denied on previous occasions.

The petition for writ of mandamus and alternative motion to enforce mandate are denied.

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

Joseph v. State, 924 So. 2d 19, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 18792, 2005 WL 3184602 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

924 So. 2d 19 (Joseph v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Joseph v. State
547 So. 2d 249 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)