RONALD JAY COATES, 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.
Ronald Jay Coates appealed the summary denial of his post-conviction relief motion, arguing the trial court erred in finding it untimely. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that Coates' timely petition to the Florida Supreme Court tolled the deadline for filing his Rule 3.850 motion, making his January 8, 2006 filing date compliant with the two-year requirement.
Coates' motion was timely filed. The filing of a petition for review with the Florida Supreme Court tolls the time for filing a Rule 3.850 motion until the supreme court denies review. Because the supreme court denied review on January 9, 2004, Coates had until January 9, 2006 to file his motion, and his January 8, 2006 filing was one day before the deadline.
[1] A timely petition for review of a district court's written opinion to the supreme court tolls the time for filing a motion for postconviction relief until the supreme cou…
[2] A judgment and sentence become final for the purpose of calculating the deadline for a postconviction relief motion when direct review proceedings are completed and juris…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Coates' timely filing of a petition to review the written opinion of this Court tolled the time for filing a rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief until the supreme court denied review.”
States the core holding that the Supreme Court petition filing tolled the deadline for the Rule 3.850 motion.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCoates was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment after a jury trial. The Fifth District affirmed his conviction on Septe…
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 Finality Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIFFIN, J.
Defendant, Ronald Jay Coates [“Coates”], appeals the summary denial, on procedural grounds, of his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We reverse and remand for the trial court to consider the motion on the merits because Coates’ timely filing of a petition to review the written opinion of this Court tolled the time for filing a rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief until the supreme court denied review.
After a trial by jury, Coates was sentenced to life imprisonment for first-degree murder. On September 26, 2003, this court affirmed his conviction and sentence in a written opinion. See Coates v. State, 855 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Our mandate issued on October 17, 2003. Coates appealed this court’s decision to the Florida supreme court, arguing jurisdiction based on express and direct conflict with decisions of other district courts of appeal. The supreme court denied review on January 9, 2004. See Coates v. State, 866 So. 2d 1212 (Fla.2004) (table).
On January 8, 2006, Coates provided his motion for postconviction relief to prison officials for mailing. On March 13, 2006, the trial court entered an order summarily denying the motion as untimely.
Rule 3.850 provides that a motion for relief pursuant to that rule must be filed within “two years after the judgment and sentence become final.” If no writ of certiorari is filed with the United States Supreme Court, the judgment and sentence become final when direct review proceedings are completed and jurisdiction to entertain the motion for postconviction relief returns to the trial court. See Scull v. State, 569 So. 2d 1251 (Fla.1990); see also Hilbert v. State, 540 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Ward v. Dugger, 508 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Here, the supreme court denied review on January 9, 2004.
Therefore, Coates had until January 9, 2006, to timely file a motion for postconviction relief in this case. Under the mailbox rule, he filed his motion one day shy of the deadline on January 8, 2006. The State properly concedes that Coates’ motion was timely filed.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
THOMPSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Filomeno v. State, 2 So. 3d 1092 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…o consider the motion on the merits. Filomeno’s timely filing of a petition to review the written opinion of this Court in his direct appeal tolled the time for filing a rule 3.850 motion until the supreme court denied review. See Coates v. State, 937 So. 2d 1143 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Rule 3.850 provides that a motion for relief must be filed within “two years after the judgment and sentence become final.” If no review is sought in the United States Supreme Court, the judgment and sentence become final when d…
Authorities Cited
- Ward v. Dugger, 508 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Scull v. State, 569 So. 2d 1251 (Fla. 1990)
- Hilbert v. State, 540 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989)
- Coates v. State, 855 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)