Steele v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Steele v. State

925 So. 2d 475, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5669, 2006 WL 1006401

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 19, 2006

DocketNo. 4D06-155

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 925 So. 2d 475 (Steele 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

Steele v. State, 925 So. 2d 475, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5669, 2006 WL 1006401 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Steele appeals the summary denial of his rule 3.850 motion for postcon-viction relief. The trial court denied appellant’s 3.850 motion as untimely without ruling on the merits of appellant’s three claims. The appellant’s rule 3.850 motion was timely filed, as his judgment and sentence were not final until the thirty day period for filing an appeal expired. Napolitano v. State, 782 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Caracciolo v. State, 564 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Accordingly, the trial court’s denial of these claims is reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing or record attachments that conclusively show appellant is not entitled to relief.

FARMER, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth Steele appeals the summary denial of his rule 3.850 motion for postcon-viction relief. The trial court denied appellant’s 3.850 motion as untimely without ruling on the merits of appellant’s three claims. The appellant’s rule 3.850 motion was timely filed, as his judgment and sentence were not final until the thirty day period for filing an appeal expired. Napolitano v. State, 782 So.2d 1012 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001); Caracciolo v. State, 564 So.2d 1163 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Accordingly, the trial court’s denial of these claims is reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing or record attachments that conclusively show appellant is not entitled to relief.

FARMER, GROSS and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

925 So. 2d 475, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 5669, 2006 WL 1006401, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/steele-v-state-fladistctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack