Stenstrom v. Dixon

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 12, 2025·No. 1D2024-2773·Published

Opinion

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________

No. 1D2024-2773 _____________________________

PATRICK H. STENSTROM,

Petitioner,

v.

RICKY D. DIXON, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections,

Respondent. _____________________________

Petition for Belated Appeal—Original Jurisdiction.

February 12, 2025

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED. See Perez v. Jones, 174 So. 3d 1088 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (holding that an appeal from the denial of a petition for writ of mandamus is civil in nature and therefore not subject to a petition for belated appeal brought under rule 9.141(c), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure).

LEWIS, BILBREY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur. _____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________

Patrick H. Stenstrom, pro se, Petitioner.

Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

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

Stenstrom v. Dixon, (Fla. Ct. App. 2025).

Stenstrom v. Dixon (Stenstrom v. Dixon) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Perez v. Jones
174 So. 3d 1088 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)