KENNETH E. MATTHEWS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 2008-06-24
No. 5D08-1164
SAWAYA, PLEUS and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
987 So. 2d 724 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (2008) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Pnce v. State, 692 So. 2d 971 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). See also Ellis v. State, 853 So. 2d 484 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003); Smith v. State, 685 So. 2d 912 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996).

SAWAYA, PLEUS and LAWSON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Smith v. State, 997 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
    …CURIAM. Travis Smith appeals the trial court’s order denying a motion for leave to amend his rule 3.850 motion. Because the trial court entered the subject order while a motion for rehearing was pending and before mandate issued in Smith v. State, 987 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008), it lacked jurisdiction, and its order is a nullity. See Carter v. State, 929 So. 2d 1161, 1162 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Hankerson v. State, 879 So. 2d 71, 72 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Accordingly, we vacate the trial court’s order and…
  • Sims v. NEW Falls Corp., 37 So. 3d 358 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010)
    …made.” Shaps v. Provident Life & Accident Ins. Co., 826 So. 2d 250, 254 n. 3 (Fla.2002) (citation and internal quotation marks omitted). “For contract cases, lex loci contractus will determine the applicable statute of limitations.” Lanoue v. Rizk, 987 So. 2d 724, 727 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008), review denied, 6 So. 3d 52 (Fla. 2009); see also Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. v. August, 530 So. 2d 293, 295 (Fla.1988); Johnson v. Allstate Ins. Co., 961 So. 2d 1113, 1114 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). If the Florida statute of limitatio…
    1 / 2
  • Harris v. State, 993 So. 2d 1176 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)
    …enters a ruling on the merits of the defendant’s original motion, provided that the amended motion was filed within the rule’s two-year time limit and does not raise successive claims. See Gaskin v. State, 737 So. 2d 509 (Fla.1999); Smith v. State, 987 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008); Oxendine v. State, 824 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). Applying this case law to the instant facts, we conclude that this matter must be remanded to the trial court for consideration of three of the four claims set forth in t…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw