Suggs v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Suggs v. State

878 So. 2d 1289, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11710, 2004 WL 1773646

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Suggs v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 795 So. 2d 1028 →

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 10, 2004·No. No. 1D04-1074·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant filed a motion in the trial court pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court denied the motion as untimely. However, because the motion was filed within two years of his conviction and sentence becoming final, the motion was timely. See [1290]*1290Gust v. State, 535 So.2d 642, 643 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Thus, the trial court had jurisdiction to consider the appellant’s motion on its merits and the trial court therefore erred in denying it as untimely.

We accordingly reverse the order and remand with directions to consider the petitioner’s motion on its merits.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DAVIS, LEWIS and POLSTON, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant filed a motion in the trial court pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court denied the motion as untimely. However, because the motion was filed within two years of his conviction and sentence becoming final, the motion was timely. See [1290]*1290Gust v. State, 535 So.2d 642, 643 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Thus, the trial court had jurisdiction to consider the appellant’s motion on its merits and the trial court therefore erred in denying it as untimely.

We accordingly reverse the order and remand with directions to consider the petitioner’s motion on its merits.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

DAVIS, LEWIS and POLSTON, JJ„ concur.

Suggs v. State, 878 So. 2d 1289, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 11710, 2004 WL 1773646 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

878 So. 2d 1289 (Suggs v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related