Khan v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Khan v. State

32 So. 3d 158, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 2949, 2010 WL 785884

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 10, 2010

Docket4D09-1366

StatusPublished

This text of 32 So. 3d 158 (Khan 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

Khan v. State, 32 So. 3d 158, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 2949, 2010 WL 785884 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Roger Khan seeks review of two orders. The first order dismisses a filing, construed as a Rule 3.850 motion, as untimely, successive, and abusive. Khan moved for rehearing, alleging that he had not sent the filing to the circuit court, nor was it intended for the court’s review. The motion for rehearing was also dismissed as frivolous. The trial court forwarded a certified copy of the order dismissing the rehearing motion to the Department of Corrections for consideration of sanctions under sections 944.279(1), 944.28, and 944.09, Florida Statutes.

We reverse and remand for the trial court to vacate the orders. The record on appeal does not reflect that Khan sent the initial filing to the circuit court such that it should have been considered as a Rule 3.850 motion and characterized as successive, untimely, and frivolous. Consequently, the order denying rehearing must be vacated as well.

FARMER, STEVENSON and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Roger Khan seeks review of two orders. The first order dismisses a filing, construed as a Rule 3.850 motion, as untimely, successive, and abusive. Khan moved for rehearing, alleging that he had not sent the filing to the circuit court, nor was it intended for the court’s review. The motion for rehearing was also dismissed as frivolous. The trial court forwarded a certified copy of the order dismissing the rehearing motion to the Department of Corrections for consideration of sanctions under sections 944.279(1), 944.28, and 944.09, Florida Statutes.

We reverse and remand for the trial court to vacate the orders. The record on appeal does not reflect that Khan sent the initial filing to the circuit court such that it should have been considered as a Rule 3.850 motion and characterized as successive, untimely, and frivolous. Consequently, the order denying rehearing must be vacated as well.

FARMER, STEVENSON and LEVINE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

32 So. 3d 158, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 2949, 2010 WL 785884, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/khan-v-state-fladistctapp-2010.