RICKEY T. NEAL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Neal appeals from an order denying his motion to disqualify a judge in a post-conviction proceeding. The Florida Fifth District Court of Appeal dismisses the appeal as both untimely and moot, finding that Neal failed to file his motion for reconsideration within the required timeframe and that the disqualification motion became moot when the original judge was reassigned.
The appeal is dismissed as both untimely and moot. The motion for reconsideration was filed after the deadline (September 6, 2005), and therefore did not toll the time for appeal. The motion to disqualify also became moot when Judge Johnson was reassigned before acting on it, rendering disqualification unnecessary.
[1] An appeal from an order denying a motion to disqualify a judge is untimely if not filed within thirty days of the order's rendition, unless a timely motion for rehearing…
[2] A motion for reconsideration of an order denying a motion to disqualify is not authorized and therefore does not toll the time for filing an appeal.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Such an order may be reviewed by prohibition or on appeal. See Kokal v. State, 901 So.2d 766 (Fla.2005), rev. denied, Kokal v. Florida, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 560, 163 L.Ed.2d 471 (2005). However, it is not clear under Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.160, whether rehearings are authorized if a motion for disqualification is denied.”
Establishes the legal uncertainty regarding whether motions for reconsideration toll the appeal deadline in disqualification orders.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNeal filed a post-conviction motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, which Judge Anthony Johnson denied on December 22, 2004. Neal then…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Untimely Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
SHARP, W., J.
Neal appeals from an order which denied his motion to disqualify a judge in a post-conviction proceeding. We dismiss this appeal because it is untimely, as well as moot.
Neal filed his post-conviction motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, which was denied by Judge Anthony Johnson on December 22, 2004. Based on the mailbox rule,1 he filed a motion to disqualify Judge Johnson on January 12, 2005, and a motion for rehearing of his 3.850 motion, on January 13, 2005. Both were denied by Judge Jose Rodriguez on August 16, 2005, after Judge Johnson had been reassigned to another division.
On September 8, 2005, pursuant to the mailbox rule, Neal filed a motion for reconsideration of the order denying his motion to disqualify. On September 14, 2005, pursuant to the mailbox rule, he also filed a notice of appeal from both Judge Johnson’s order denying his 3.850 motion, and Judge Rodriguez’s denial of his motion for rehearing. The 3.850 appeal was dismissed by this court because the motion for rehearing was untimely and did not toll the time for filing an appeal. See Neal v. State, 915 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005).
Judge Rodriguez denied Neal’s motion for reconsideration of his order denying disqualification of Judge Johnson, by a written order rendered on February 14, 2006. Neal is seeking to appeal that order in this appeal.
Such an order may be reviewed by prohibition or on appeal. See Kokal v. State, 901 So. 2d 766 (Fla.2005), rev. denied, Kokal v. Florida, — U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 560, 163 L.Ed.2d 471 (2005). However, it is not clear under Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.160, whether rehearings are authorized if a motion for disqualification is denied. Since the order is not final, it does not appear that rehearing would be appropriate. If not authorized, the motion for reconsideration would not toll the time to file an appeal, and the appeal should have been filed within thirty days after the rendition date of the order denying the motion to disqualify.
Even if a motion for reconsideration is authorized, under the facts of this case, it could be viewed as being abandoned when the notice of appeal was filed from the orders denying the 3.850 motion and motion for rehearing. The 3.850 appeal was dismissed as untimely.
Alternatively, the motion for reconsideration was untimely and thus did not toll the time for taking an appeal. The order denying the motion to disqualify was served by mail on August 16, 2005. For motions for .rehearing filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850,. the motion must be filed within 15 days from service of the order denying relief. If three days are added to the fifteen-day period because service was by mail,2 the eighteenth day fell on a Saturday and the following Monday was a holiday. Thus, Neal had until September 6, 2005 to place his motion into the hands of prison officials for mailing. The official prison stamp indicates his motion was provided to prison officials for mailing on September 8, 2005.
We also view the motion to disqualify as moot. It was directed to Judge Johnson, who did not act on it after he had been transferred to another division. Thus, it was not necessary to disqualify Judge Johnson in order to have Neal’s motion for rehearing, which was directed to his 3.850 motion, considered and ruled upon by a successor judge. Judge Rodriguez actually ruled on it.
DISMISSED.
GRIFFIN and TORPY, JJ., concur. . See Fla. R.App. P. 9.420(a)(2).
. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(g); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.070.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thaddeus Chaylon Martin v. State, 238 So. 3d 369 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…ssigned to the juvenile division, and therefore was no longer presiding over Martin's case. The newly-assigned judge correctly denied Martin's motion both on its merits and in light of the reassignment of the original trial judge. See Neal v. State, 929 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (holding that motion to disqualify postconviction judge from ruling on defendant's motion for rehearing of his motion for postconviction relief was rendered moot by that judge's reassignment to another division). We also find no…
Authorities Cited
- Kokal v. State, 901 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 2005)
- Neal v. State, 915 So. 2d 746 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)