Kevin Terrell Thomas v. State of Florida

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 3, 2026
Docket4D2026-0195
StatusPublished

This text of Kevin Terrell Thomas v. State of Florida (Kevin Terrell Thomas 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.

Bluebook
Kevin Terrell Thomas v. State of Florida, (Fla. Ct. App. 2026).

Opinion

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

KEVIN TERRELL THOMAS, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

No. 4D2026-0195

[June 3, 2026]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Lawrence Michael Mirman, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562016CF000966AXXXXX.

Kevin Terrell Thomas, Milton, pro se.

James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Heidi Lynn Bettendorf, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

On Confession of Error

PER CURIAM.

Kevin Terrell Thomas appeals an order that disposed of his rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. The state concedes the trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on appellant’s premature motion, filed while appellant awaited resentencing pursuant to this Court’s 2021 appellate mandate. Thomas v. State, 324 So. 3d 518 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021).

We accept the state’s concession of error and reverse and remand with directions for the trial court to dismiss the motion as premature, as finality for purposes of filing a rule 3.850 motion occurs after resentencing when resentencing flows from a direct appeal. See State v. Gomez, 247 So. 3d 592, 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018) (“As this Court has previously held, a conviction and sentence become final for the purposes of rule 3.850 when this Court affirms following resentencing.”); see also Ross v. State, 947 So. 2d 699, 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (holding that rule 3.850 motion was timely filed where the motion was filed within two years of both the conviction and sentence becoming final).

Reversed and remanded with directions.

LEVINE, SHEPHERD and SHAW, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely-filed motion for rehearing.

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

Related

Ross v. State
947 So. 2d 699 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)
State v. Gomez
247 So. 3d 592 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Kevin Terrell Thomas v. State of Florida, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kevin-terrell-thomas-v-state-of-florida-fladistctapp-2026.