STEVEN MERCER, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2009-10-08
No. 1D09-3112
Webster, J., Davis, J., Padovano, J.
18 So. 3d 1236 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2009)

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.

Synopsis

The appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion as untimely, holding that when the filing deadline falls on a weekend and the prison law library is closed, the deadline extends to the next business day when the inmate can deliver the motion to prison officials.


Holding

When a postconviction motion deadline falls on a weekend and the prison law library is closed, the deadline extends to the next business day when the inmate delivers the motion to prison officials.


Headnotes

[1] When a postconviction motion deadline falls on a weekend and the prison law library is closed, the deadline extends to the next business day when the inmate can deliver t…

Previewing 1 of 1 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

Facts & Procedural History

Mercer's case became final on July 5, 2006, making his Rule 3.850 motion due by July 5, 2008. July 5, 2008, was a Saturday, and the prison law library…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant appeals the trial court’s order denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion as untimely filed. The appellant’s case became final on July 5, 2006, and thus the motion was due to be filed, in accordance with the rule’s two-year filing deadline, by July 5, 2008. However, July 5, 2008, was a Saturday. The appellant placed the motion into the hands of prison officials on Monday, July 7, 2008. The lower court denied the motion as untimely filed.

The State, in response to this Court’s show cause order issued pursuant to Toler v. State, 493 So.2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), responded that the prison law library, which it asserts is responsible for accepting and mailing to the court postcon-viction motions, was closed July 4 through July 6, 2008. Thus, the State concedes that the appellant had until July 7, 2008, to place his motion into the hands of prison officials in order for the motion to be considered timely filed. As the appellant did just that, the motion was timely filed. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.040; Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.850(b); Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614 (FIa.1992) (analyzing and discussing the “mailbox rule”).

We therefore reverse and remand the order for the trial court to address the merits of the appellant’s motion.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

WEBSTER, DAVIS, and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw