Sweeting v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sweeting v. State

900 So. 2d 780, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6637, 2005 WL 1047265

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 6, 2005

DocketNo. 5D05-983

StatusPublished

This text of 900 So. 2d 780 (Sweeting 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

Sweeting v. State, 900 So. 2d 780, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6637, 2005 WL 1047265 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

While it is difficult to tell from the petition filed with this court, it appears that the petitioner is seeking review of an order of the trial court denying his motion for a DNA evidence examination. The petition is, however, facially insufficient in that it fails to comply with the requirements of [781]*781Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c)(3), and must, accordingly, be dismissed. The dismissal is without prejudice so that the petitioner may attempt to file a facially sufficient petition.

DISMISSED.

SAWAYA, C.J., THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

While it is difficult to tell from the petition filed with this court, it appears that the petitioner is seeking review of an order of the trial court denying his motion for a DNA evidence examination. The petition is, however, facially insufficient in that it fails to comply with the requirements of [781]*781Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c)(3), and must, accordingly, be dismissed. The dismissal is without prejudice so that the petitioner may attempt to file a facially sufficient petition.

DISMISSED.

SAWAYA, C.J., THOMPSON and MONACO, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

900 So. 2d 780, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 6637, 2005 WL 1047265, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sweeting-v-state-fladistctapp-2005.