Thornton v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Thornton v. State

164 So. 3d 126, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 6875, 2015 WL 2139127

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 8, 2015

Docket2D14-5297

StatusPublished

This text of 164 So. 3d 126 (Thornton 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

Thornton v. State, 164 So. 3d 126, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 6875, 2015 WL 2139127 (Fla. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

LUCAS, Judge.

The post conviction court denied Sammy Thornton’s untimely motion for extension of time to file an amended motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and then summarily denied the untimely filed amended motion. We find no abuse of discretion on the part of the postconviction court and accordingly affirm. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(2) (“[I]f the defendant fails to file an amended motion within the time allowed for such amendment, the court, in its discretion, may permit the' defendant an additional opportunity to amend the motion or may enter a final, appealable order summarily denying the motion with prejudice.”).

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.

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

LUCAS, Judge.

The post conviction court denied Sammy Thornton’s untimely motion for extension of time to file an amended motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 and then summarily denied the untimely filed amended motion. We find no abuse of discretion on the part of the postconviction court and accordingly affirm. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(2) (“[I]f the defendant fails to file an amended motion within the time allowed for such amendment, the court, in its discretion, may permit the' defendant an additional opportunity to amend the motion or may enter a final, appealable order summarily denying the motion with prejudice.”).

Affirmed.

CASANUEVA and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

164 So. 3d 126, 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 6875, 2015 WL 2139127, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thornton-v-state-fladistctapp-2015.