Rojas v. State

816 So. 2d 1270, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 8210, 2002 WL 1284223
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rojas v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 790 So. 2d 1219
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 12, 2002·No. No. 3D02-0979·Published

Opinion

CONFESSION OF ERROR

PER curiam.

The state correctly concedes that the trial court erred in summarily denying defendant’s motion for post-conviction relief on the grounds that it was untimely filed. Defendant’s conviction and sentence became final upon this Court’s issuance of a mandate on March 24, 2000. Defendant filed his motion for post-conviction relief on March 6, 2002, within two years of the date of the mandate. Thus, defendant’s motion was timely. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand the case to the trial court to permit the defendant to file an amended motion for post-conviction relief, which is to relate back to the original date of filing.

Reversed and remanded with instructions.

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

Rojas v. State, 816 So. 2d 1270, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 8210, 2002 WL 1284223 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

816 So. 2d 1270 (Rojas v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.