STACEY MOORE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Stacey Moore appeals the trial court’s order summarily denying his amended motion for post conviction relief filed in accordance with this Court’s earlier opinion and mandate in Moore v. State, 960 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007). The trial court summarily denied the amended motion based on a State response filed there, arguing that it was successive. The State concedes that the trial court erred in summarily denying Moore’s amended motion for post conviction relief as successive because this Court’s previous opinion expressly authorized the amended motion. We agree.
Therefore, trial court’s order summarily denying the amended motion is reversed and the cause is remanded for further consideration.
Reversed and Remanded.
STONE, POLEN, and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Giddens v. Tlsty, 98 So. 3d 257 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…our mandate.” Superior Prot., Inc. v. Martinez, 930 So. 2d 859, 860 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006). So long as the motion to tax appellate costs is timely, costs must be taxed in favor of the party who prevailed on the appeal. See Martin v. Hialeah Hous. Auth., 972 So. 2d 1113, 1114 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (“Under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.400(a), a party may serve a motion to tax costs within thirty days after the issuance of the mandate. Thus, by its terms, rule 9.400(a) authorizes proceedings for appellate costs…
Authorities Cited
- Alvarez v. State, 960 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- Moore v. State, 960 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)