Offen v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Offen v. State

662 So. 2d 742, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11662, 1995 WL 654447

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 8, 1995

DocketNo. 95-2537

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 662 So. 2d 742 (Offen 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

Offen v. State, 662 So. 2d 742, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11662, 1995 WL 654447 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this petition for writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner, Bernard C. Offen, seeks leave to file a belated appeal from an order of the trial court denying his Rule 3.800 motion. While this habeas petition was pending, Of-fen filed an untimely notice of appeal from the order denying post-conviction relief (pending case no. 95-2991). This court deferred consideration of that appeal pending disposition of the instant petition. The state concedes that the writ should be granted because petitioner has demonstrated exceptional circumstances that have rendered the ordinary appellate process unavailable and that justice demands a remedy. See Hollingshead v. Wainwright, 194 So.2d 577, 578 [743]*743(Fla.1967). Specifically, Offen had been transferred to a medical facility by the Department of Corrections where his mail was unavailable for the entire 30 day period after rendition of the order he seeks to appeal.

Accordingly, we grant the writ so that Offen’s notice of appeal in pending case no. 95-2991 may be considered as timely filed.

STONE, POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this petition for writ of habeas corpus, the petitioner, Bernard C. Offen, seeks leave to file a belated appeal from an order of the trial court denying his Rule 3.800 motion. While this habeas petition was pending, Of-fen filed an untimely notice of appeal from the order denying post-conviction relief (pending case no. 95-2991). This court deferred consideration of that appeal pending disposition of the instant petition. The state concedes that the writ should be granted because petitioner has demonstrated exceptional circumstances that have rendered the ordinary appellate process unavailable and that justice demands a remedy. See Hollingshead v. Wainwright, 194 So.2d 577, 578 [743]*743(Fla.1967). Specifically, Offen had been transferred to a medical facility by the Department of Corrections where his mail was unavailable for the entire 30 day period after rendition of the order he seeks to appeal.

Accordingly, we grant the writ so that Offen’s notice of appeal in pending case no. 95-2991 may be considered as timely filed.

STONE, POLEN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

662 So. 2d 742, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 11662, 1995 WL 654447, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/offen-v-state-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack