STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN FERRAS, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1985-04-10
No. 84-950
HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and BARRETT, JJ., concur.
467 So. 2d 765 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1985) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We reverse and remand upon the authority of Jenkins v. State, 389 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 1980). Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191(g) calls for a ninety-day extension, beginning on receipt of the mandate, and is equally applicable whether the state or defendant brings the interlocutory appeal and regardless of whether the appeal succeeds or fails. Absent the rule, a ninety-day extension is appropriate in all such eases. See Jenkins, supra, and numerous district court opinions, e.g., State v. McQuay, 423 So. 2d 1001 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The trial court’s initial order, granting the ninety-day extension, which it was later persuaded to withdraw, was correct.

HERSEY, GLICKSTEIN and BARRETT, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Rohm, 645 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 1994)
    …and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. It is so ordered. GRIMES, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW, KOGAN, HARDING and WELLS, JJ., concur. . Other courts have applied this construction to rule 3.191(g). See, e.g., State v. Ferras, 467 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); State v. Sagre, 435 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); State v. White, 436 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), review denied, 446 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 1984); State v. Jowais, 423 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). . The 15-day window period pr…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw