Madrigal v. State
969 So. 2d 1204, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 19696, 2007 WL 4322328
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 12, 2007·No. No. 2D07-2667·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Victor Madrigal appeals an order summarily denying his motion to correct or modify sentence. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(c). We treat the motion as a timely filed petition for writ of certiorari. See Seward v. State, 912 So.2d 389, 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Based on our precedent, we grant the petition, quash the order, and remand to the postconviction court to consider the merits of Mr. Madrigal’s motion. See McCormick v. State, 961 So.2d 1099, 1102 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007); Cunniff v. State, 950 So.2d 1255, 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Madrigal v. State, 969 So. 2d 1204, 2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 19696, 2007 WL 4322328 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).
969 So. 2d 1204 (Madrigal v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Real Investments, LLC v. Oaks Group, Inc.
969 So. 2d 1204 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)