NICOLAS MATOS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Nicolas Matos sought a belated appeal of the trial court's denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction relief motion. The court granted the petition for belated appeal but found that Matos had made false representations about when he received the denial order and recommended sanctions.
The court granted Matos's petition for belated appeal based on the State's agreement not to object, given that Matos was hospitalized between receipt of the order and the appeal deadline. However, the court found that Matos knowingly or recklessly presented false information to the court regarding when he received the denial order.
[1] A petition for a belated appeal may be granted when the State does not object, even if the petitioner's allegations regarding receipt of the order are not entirely true.
[2] A prisoner may be sanctioned under section 944.279, Florida Statutes, for knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth bringing false information or evidence before…
Previewing 2 of 4 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“knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth brought false information or evidence before the court”
Establishes the standard for sanctioning and describes Matos's conduct in misrepresenting when he received the denial order
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court denied Matos's Rule 3.850 motion on December 10, 2010. Matos claimed he did not receive the denial order until January 27, 2011, after…
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 Petition For Belated Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
Nicolas Matos seeks a belated appeal of the trial court’s denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c). We grant the petition. This opinion shall be filed in the lower court and treated as a notice of appeal of the order denying Matos’s 3.850 motion. For the reasons explained below, we also order that our clerk send a certified copy of this opinion to the appropriate correctional facility within the Department of Corrections pursuant to section 944.279, Florida Statutes, and 'direct that the Department consider levying sanctions against Matos pursuant to that statute.
On December 10, 2010, the trial court entered an order denying Matos’s rule 3.850 motion. In his petition for belated appeal, Matos asserted that the denial order was not mailed to him until December 21, 2010. He also alleged that the trial court mailed the order to the Central Florida Reception Center, instead of Hardee Correctional Institution where he was located. He alleged that he was transferred from Hardee Correctional Institution to a Kendall, Florida medical facility to address his “ongoing medical issues” — and that he did not receive the trial court’s denial order until January 27, 2011, after being transferred back to Hardee Correctional Institution and well after the deadline for filing a notice of appeal. Matos’s allegation that he did not receive the denial order until January 27, 2011, is not true.
As found by the trial court, acting as a commissioner in connection with our consideration of this petition, Matos actually received the order in December 2010, before the deadline for appeal. At the evi-dentiary hearing, Matos himself ultimately testified that he received the trial court’s order “a week or two after the court’s ruling.”1 In other words, Matos “knowingly or with reckless disregard for the truth brought false information or evidence before the court” when he alleged in the petition for belated appeal that the order was not delivered to him until January 27, 2011. Based upon this false representation, Matos should be sanctioned. § 944.279, Fla. Stat. (2010).
Nevertheless, the State indicated in the lower court that it does not object to granting Matos a belated appeal in light of the fact that Matos was hospitalized between the date he received the order and the deadline for filing a notice of appeal. Based upon the State’s agreement, we grant the petition for belated appeal.
PETITION FOR BELATED APPEAL GRANTED; ORDERED THAT COPY OF OPINION BE SENT TO CORRECTIONAL INSTITUTION FOR CONSIDERATION OF SANCTIONS.
TORPY, LAWSON, and EVANDER, JJ., concur.