Parker v. State

65 So. 3d 585, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10902, 2011 WL 2685678
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Parker v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2008 Fla. App. LEXIS 15419
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 12, 2011·No. No. 1D11-1563·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of the trial court’s order denying his rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief as untimely. We reverse.

Appellant’s judgment and sentence became final on February 19, 2009, when the Florida Supreme Court denied review of this court’s decision affirming the judgment and sentence. Parker v. State, 1 So.3d 173 (Fla.2009) (table), denying review of, 973 So.2d 1167 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007). The two-year period for filing a rule 3.850 motion expired on Monday, February 21, 2011, because February 19, 2011, was a Saturday. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.040, 3.850(b). The record reflects that Appellant provided his motion to prison officials for mailing on February 21, 2011, and pursuant to Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614 (Fla.1992), and Thompson v. State, 761 So.2d 324 (Fla.2000), the motion was deemed filed on that date. Accordingly, the motion was timely-filed and the trial court erred in denying the motion as untimely.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BENTON, C.J., LEWIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.

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

Parker v. State, 65 So. 3d 585, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 10902, 2011 WL 2685678 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

65 So. 3d 585 (Parker v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Haag v. State
591 So. 2d 614 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1992)
Parker v. State
973 So. 2d 1167 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2007)
Thompson v. State
761 So. 2d 324 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)