Richardson v. State

775 So. 2d 366, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 14079, 2000 WL 1644336
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Richardson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 719 So. 2d 39
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 3, 2000·No. No. 2D00-2594·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Frederick Richardson appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm the trial court’s order denying the motion as untimely because it was not filed within two years of the issuance of this court’s mandate in Richardson’s direct appeal. See Beaty v. State, 701 So.2d 856 (Fla.1997). This affirmance is, however, without prejudice to Richardson filing a motion pursuant to rule 3.800(a).

Affirmed.

ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and CASANUEVA and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.

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

Richardson v. State, 775 So. 2d 366, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 14079, 2000 WL 1644336 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

775 So. 2d 366 (Richardson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Beaty v. State
701 So. 2d 856 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1997)