Peterson v. State
88 So. 3d 1035, 2012 WL 1886012, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8441
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Peterson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 19772 →
Opinions
James Peterson appeals the lower court’s order dismissing his rule 3.850 motion as untimely. We reverse because Peterson’s motion was directed to his resen-tencing and was filed within two years of his sentence becoming final.1 Thus, it was timely. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b). On remand, the lower court is instructed to consider Peterson’s motion on the merits.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Peterson v. State, 88 So. 3d 1035, 2012 WL 1886012, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8441 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).
88 So. 3d 1035 (Peterson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Spera v. State
971 So. 2d 754 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2007)