DANIEL PAUL PERLEY, 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.
The court reversed the trial court's denial of Perley's motion for postconviction relief on the grounds of prematurity, holding that the motion was timely filed because his conviction for resisting arrest became final when the appellate court affirmed it, regardless of the pending retrial on the separate escape charge.
The motion for postconviction relief was not premature or moot. A judgment and sentence become final when direct review proceedings have concluded and jurisdiction returns to the sentencing court. For the resisting conviction, all review was concluded upon affirmance, making the motion timely and giving the trial court jurisdiction to consider it on its merits.
[1] A motion for postconviction relief is not premature when the conviction and sentence for which relief is sought have been affirmed on direct appeal.
[2] A judgment and sentence are considered final for purposes of postconviction relief when direct review proceedings have concluded and jurisdiction returns to the sentencin…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“A judgment and sentence are deemed final 'when any such direct review proceedings have concluded and jurisdiction to entertain a motion for post-conviction relief returns to the sentencing court.'”
Establishes the legal standard for when a conviction becomes final for purposes of postconviction relief motions under Florida law.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePerley was convicted and sentenced for one count of escape and two counts of resisting an officer without violence. On direct appeal, the appellate co…
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 Jurisdiction Of Sentencing Court cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, J.
We reverse the trial court’s order denying appellant’s motion for postconviction relief. The court determined that the motion was premature. Because the conviction and sentence for which postconviction relief was sought was final, the motion was not premature.
Appellant was convicted and sentenced for one count of escape and two counts of resisting an officer without violence. He appealed his convictions. In Perley v. State, 947 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007), we affirmed his .conviction for resisting without violence but reversed the conviction of escape for a new trial.
After the appeal, appellant filed a motion for postconviction relief as to the resisting conviction but not as to the escapé for which a new trial was scheduled. The trial court denied the motion-on the ground that the case was not “final” because of the retrial for escape, and appellant would have his postconviction remedy available once his trial on the escape charge was concluded. Appellant timely moved for rehearing. By the time the trial court ruled on the motion, appellant had been acquitted of the escape charge. The court ruled that the case was “closed” before the defendant filed his motion for reconsideration. The court deemed the matter “moot.” This appeal follows. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.850 provides a time limitation of two years to bring a motion for postconviction relief. It states:
(b) Time Limitations. A motion to vacate a sentence that exceeds the limits provided by law may be filed at any time. No other motion shall be filed or considered pursuant to this rule if filed more than 2 years after the judgment and sentence become final in a noncapi-tal case....
(emphasis added). A judgment and sentence are deemed final “when any such direct review proceedings have concluded and jurisdiction to entertain a motion for post-conviction relief returns to the sentencing court.” Ward v. Dugger, 508 So. 2d 778, 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). See also Ferris v. State, 575 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991).
For the purposes of appellant’s conviction for resisting arrest, all review was concluded when the conviction was affirmed, and jurisdiction was returned to the trial court. No further action could be taken as a result of the affirmance. Therefore, the court had jurisdiction to consider the motion for postconviction relief directed to this conviction and sentence.
We therefore reverse the denial of the motion on the grounds that it was premature or “moot.” We remand for consideration of the motion on its merits.
SHAHOOD, C.J., and STEVENSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Lewis v. State, 196 So. 3d 423 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…to the convictions for attempted robbery, aggravated assault, and resisting arrest, the judgment and sentence became final when the convictions were affirmed and review in the Florida Supreme Court was dismissed on May 19, 2011. See Perley v. State, 968 So. 2d 679, 680 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (holding that where a defendant appeals multiple .convictions and one is reversed for further proceedings but the others are affirmed, the time for post-conviction relief on the affirmed convictions begins to run when jurisd…
Authorities Cited
- Ward v. Dugger, 508 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Perley v. State, 947 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Ferris v. State, 575 So. 2d 303 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)