Shockley v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Shockley v. State

823 So. 2d 236, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10938, 2002 WL 1772632

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 2, 2002

DocketNo. 1D02-1703

StatusPublished

This text of 823 So. 2d 236 (Shockley v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Shockley v. State, 823 So. 2d 236, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10938, 2002 WL 1772632 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from the trial court’s denial of a rule 3.800 motion is dismissed as untimely because the notice of appeal was certified as filed more than 30 days after the order denying the motion, and in response to our order to show cause the appellant has acknowledged that the notice was untimely. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(b), 9.420(a)(1), (e) (2002).

The appellant’s request for a belated appeal is denied.

DISMISSED.

BOOTH, WOLF, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from the trial court’s denial of a rule 3.800 motion is dismissed as untimely because the notice of appeal was certified as filed more than 30 days after the order denying the motion, and in response to our order to show cause the appellant has acknowledged that the notice was untimely. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(b), 9.420(a)(1), (e) (2002).

The appellant’s request for a belated appeal is denied.

DISMISSED.

BOOTH, WOLF, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

823 So. 2d 236, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 10938, 2002 WL 1772632, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shockley-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.