SAMUEL BOOTH, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2009-08-06
No. 1D09-0015
HAWKES, C.J., ALLEN and BENTON, JJ., concur.
14 So. 3d 291 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2009) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Topics
Rule 3.850 Motion Timeliness Of Motion Motion For Rehearing Finality Of Judgment

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 3.850 Motion cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant filed a rule 3.850 motion, which the trial court denied as untimely, advising, “No motion for rehearing, reconsideration or clarification will be entertained.” Appellant filed a motion for rehearing, alerting the trial court to controlling authority that it had apparently overlooked, but the trial court stamped the motion with “NO ACTION REQUIRED.” On appeal, Appellant raises two issues (1) the trial court erred in summarily denying his rule 3.850 motion because it was timely filed, and (2) the trial court abused its discretion by refusing to entertain the motion for rehearing.

We only need to address the issue of timeliness. Appellant did not appeal his judgment and sentence. Thus, his judgment and sentence became final 30 days later when the time for filing an appeal passed. See Gust v. State, 535 So.2d 642, 643 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Appellant timely filed his rule 3.850 motion because he filed it within two years of that date. See id. We therefore reverse the order denying the motion as untimely.

REVERSED.

HAWKES, C.J., ALLEN and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Yoder v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Sarasota County) (M.D. Fla. 2022)
    …aim” is pending. 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(2). Mr. Yoder’s sentences were entered on September 12, 2016. (Doc. 8-2, Ex. 7.) Because Mr. Yoder did not file a direct appeal, his judgment became final 30 days later, on October 12, 2016. See Booth v. State, 14 So. 3d 291, 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“Appellant did not appeal his judgment and sentence. Thus, his judgment and sentence became final 30 days later when the time for filing an appeal passed.”). Mr. Yoder’s AEDPA limitations period began running the…
  • Shakoor v. State of Fla. (Pinellas County) (M.D. Fla. 2021)
    …9926CFANO and CRC14- 02528CFANO on April 9, 2014. (Doc. 11-4, Ex. 18, p. 2). He did not file a direct appeal in these two cases. (Id.). Therefore, his judgment became final on May 9, 2014, 30 days after his sentence was imposed. See Booth v. State, 14 So. 3d 291, 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“Appellant did not appeal his judgment and sentence. Thus, his judgment and sentence became final 30 days later when the time for filing an appeal passed.”). Shakoor did not file a state court tolling application with respe…
  • Davis v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Sarasota County) (M.D. Fla. 2020)
    …iod. If the amended sentence, filed April 17, 2015, controls, then Davis’s federal habeas petition is timely. Davis’s judgment would have become final on May 18, 2015, upon expiration of the 30-day period to file a direct appeal. See Booth v. State, 14 So. 3d 291, 292 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (“Appellant did not appeal his judgment and sentence. Thus, his judgment and sentence became final 30 days later when the time for filing an appeal passed.”).1 Davis’s one-year limitations period would have started running…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw