Vreeland v. State

72 So. 3d 802, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 16561, 2011 WL 4953417
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedOctober 19, 2011
DocketNo. 1D11-1880
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 72 So. 3d 802 (Vreeland 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
Vreeland v. State, 72 So. 3d 802, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 16561, 2011 WL 4953417 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The order of the circuit court denying appellant’s motion seeking the appointment of counsel for postconviction purposes is not among the class of orders appealable by a defendant pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(1). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. This disposition is without prejudice, however, to appellant’s right to file a proper petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel a ruling by the circuit court on appellant’s pending motion(s) requesting that he be granted relief from his conviction.

BENTON, C.J., VAN NORTWICK and SWANSON, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Nino Chet Tartarini v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017
Tartarini v. State
225 So. 3d 925 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)
Covington v. State
117 So. 3d 453 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
72 So. 3d 802, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 16561, 2011 WL 4953417, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vreeland-v-state-fladistctapp-2011.