Ray v. State

89 So. 3d 304, 2012 WL 2123187, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 9593
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 13, 2012·No. No. 1D12-1156·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petition for belated appeal is denied on the merits. In order to be timely, a pleading invoking the court’s jurisdiction must be filed within the required time and merely mailing the notice within the required time period is not sufficient. Raysor v. Raysor, 706 So.2d 400 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Coca Cola Foods v. Cordero, 589 So.2d 961 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Petitioner is not entitled to rely on the “mailbox rule” because there is no showing that petitioner was an inmate at the time the notice of appeal was served. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.420(a)(2) (providing that a “document filed by a pro se inmate confined in an institution is timely filed if the inmate places the document in the hands of an institution official for mailing on or before the last day for filing”); Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614 (Fla.1992).

PETITION DENIED.

VAN NORTWICK, THOMAS, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.

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

Ray v. State, 89 So. 3d 304, 2012 WL 2123187, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 9593 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

89 So. 3d 304 (Ray v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Donaldson v. State
136 So. 3d 1281 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)