THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
TOMAS ANTONIO LOPEZ, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2001-05-09
No. 3D00-2552
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and JORGENSON and SHEVIN, JJ.
785 So. 2d 667 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2001) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order granting defendant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that defendant did not lack due diligence in bringing his claim and that there was not inordinate prejudice to the state. See State v. Perry, 786 So. 2d 554 (Fla.2001), and cases cited therein. Contrary to the state’s assertion the transcript of the evidentiary hearing demonstrates that the trial court properly addressed the laches issue and properly found that Gregersen v. State, 714 So. 2d 1195 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), affirming, 758 So. 2d 106 (Fla.2000) is factually distinguishable.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Dep't of Hwy. Safety & Motor Vehicles v. Alliston, 813 So. 2d 141 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
    …iorari is available, one consideration is whether the error is isolated in its effect or whether it is pervasive or widespread in its application to numerous other proceedings. See, e.g., Progressive Specialty Ins. Co. v. Biomechanical Trauma Ass’n, 785 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Stilson v. Allstate Ins. Co., 692 So. 2d 979 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Thus, a circuit court order that is particularly fact-specific and fact-dependent, or an order that provides a result without a written opinion and therefore cannot…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw