Young v. State
66 So. 3d 1076, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12386, 2011 WL 3464321
Opinion
The appellant is appealing an order in which the trial court struck the appellant’s postconviction claims as facially insufficient and, in accordance with Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754, 761 (Fla.2007), granted the appellant thirty days to amend. The order is a nonappealable, nonfinal order. See Lee v. State, 939 So.2d 154, 155 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006).
DISMISSED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Young v. State, 66 So. 3d 1076, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 12386, 2011 WL 3464321 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).
66 So. 3d 1076 (Young v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Corn v. State
237 So. 3d 483 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018)
Michael W. Corn v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018
Robert Glen Hill I I v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017
Bond v. State
185 So. 3d 699 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Stewart Charles Bond v. State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016