Outlaw v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Outlaw v. State

96 So. 3d 1057, 2012 WL 3822128, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14740

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 5, 2012

DocketNo. 2D11-981

StatusPublished

This text of 96 So. 3d 1057 (Outlaw 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

Outlaw v. State, 96 So. 3d 1057, 2012 WL 3822128, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14740 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal due to the untimely filing of the notice of appeal. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.140; Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(h). Because counsel for Jarrish Outlaw filed the motion for rehearing more than fifteen days after service of the final order, it did not toll the time for filing the appeal, regardless of the fact that the postconviction court chose to address that untimely motion for rehearing. See Reid v. Cooper, 955 So.2d 31, 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (holding that an untimely motion for rehearing is a nullity and does not toll the time in which to file an appeal).

This dismissal is without prejudice to counsel filing a motion in this case number for a belated appeal, observing all the requirements of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c), including the submission of an affidavit or sworn pleading by counsel with first-hand knowledge of the facts giving rise to the application for a belated appeal.

Dismissed.

CASANUEVA, WALLACE, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This court is without jurisdiction to consider this appeal due to the untimely filing of the notice of appeal. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.140; Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(h). Because counsel for Jarrish Outlaw filed the motion for rehearing more than fifteen days after service of the final order, it did not toll the time for filing the appeal, regardless of the fact that the postconviction court chose to address that untimely motion for rehearing. See Reid v. Cooper, 955 So.2d 31, 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (holding that an untimely motion for rehearing is a nullity and does not toll the time in which to file an appeal).

This dismissal is without prejudice to counsel filing a motion in this case number for a belated appeal, observing all the requirements of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c), including the submission of an affidavit or sworn pleading by counsel with first-hand knowledge of the facts giving rise to the application for a belated appeal.

Dismissed.

CASANUEVA, WALLACE, and CRENSHAW, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

96 So. 3d 1057, 2012 WL 3822128, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 14740, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/outlaw-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack