Martin v. Florida Dept. of Corrections
This text of 768 So. 2d 1150 (Martin v. Florida Dept. of Corrections) 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.
Opinion
Patrick MARTIN, Petitioner,
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
Petitioner, pro se.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, and Carolyn J. Mosley, Assistant General Counsel, Department of Corrections, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
Patrick Martin filed an appeal from the denial of his petition for mandamus. We treat his appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari. See Sheley v. Florida Parole Comm'n, 720 So.2d 216 (Fla.1998). Because the untimely motion for rehearing did not postpone the rendition of the order, we dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. Simonetta v. Moore, 730 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Griffis v. State, 593 So.2d 308 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (untimely motion for rehearing does not postpone rendition of order). The petitioner's request for a refund of filing fees is denied.
WEBSTER, PADOVANO, and BROWNING, JJ., CONCUR.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
768 So. 2d 1150, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 11212, 2000 WL 1232866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martin-v-florida-dept-of-corrections-fladistctapp-2000.