GARY T. WINSLOW, II, 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 dismissed an untimely appeal because the notice of appeal was filed more than thirty days after judgment, and a motion to reduce sentence under Rule 3.800(c) does not toll the appeal deadline.
A motion to reduce a sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) does not stay rendition or toll the time for filing an appeal.
[1] A motion to reduce a sentence under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) does not stay rendition or toll the time for filing a notice of appeal, and orders on such…
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“A motion to reduce a sentence is not a post-judgment motion which tolls the time for filing an appeal.”
Court citing Klemba v. State to distinguish between motions that toll the appeal deadline and those that do not.
Winslow received a judgment and sentence on January 8, 2010. He filed a Motion to Modify Sentence on March 19, 2010, seeking reduction based on mitiga…
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 Post-Judgment Motions cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal is untimely. The appellant sought review of a judgment and sentence rendered on January 8, 2010. The notice of appeal, filed on March 23, 2010, was filed more than thirty days after this date of rendition. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.110(b). In response to a sua sponte order, the appellant argued that the Court’s jurisdiction was timely invoked because rendition had been delayed until March 19, 2010, by a timely Motion to Modify Sentence that was filed to correct a sentencing error. A timely motion to correct a sentence filed *975pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(1) will stay rendition under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h). However, the attached motion did not raise a sentencing error or otherwise challenge the sentence as erroneous. Rather, the appellant sought a reduction and modification of his sentence due to mitigating factors that were detailed in the motion, which was brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c). “A motion to reduce a sentence is not a post-judgment motion which tolls the time for filing an appeal.” Klemba v. State, 490 So.2d 1050 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). See Fla. R.App. P. 9.020(h); Jones v. State, 28 So.3d 981 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). Additionally, an order on a 3.800(c) motion is not appealable. Davis v. State, 745 So.2d 499 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Daniels v. State, 568 So.2d 63 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Therefore, the Court lacks jurisdiction to review the orders on appeal.
DISMISSED.
WEBSTER, WETHERELL, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Davis v. State, 745 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- PIA Psychiatric Hosps., Inc. v. State, 568 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Klemba v. State, 490 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
- Jones v. State, 28 So. 3d 981 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)