TORIANO GRANT, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 1st DCA | 2012-06-25
No. 1D11-0719
BENTON, C.J., THOMAS, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.
102 So. 3d 668 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2012) Caution
Cited by 6 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Dismissed. See Bridges v. State, 863 So.2d 366, 366 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (“[T]here is no authority under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(/) or Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure *6699.020(h), for filing a motion for rehearing of an order denying a motion to withdraw pleas.”).

BENTON, C.J., THOMAS, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Debrah Gadol v. Masoret Yehudit, 132 So. 3d 939 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)
    …ange of physician, without regard to medical necessity. See Sunbelt Health Care v. Galva, 7 So. 3d 556, 561 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). A PFB can constitute the “written request of the employee.” See HMSHOST Corp./Gallagher Bassett Servs. Inc. v. Frederic, 102 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). An E/C timely responds by informing the claimant of the new doctor’s name; a timely response does not require the E/C to actually contact or schedule an appointment with the new doctor. See id. The five-day response period in th…
  • …g an appointment. “Based on the plain reading of the statute, an E/C is required, however, to authorize at least one specific physician within five days of a claimant’s request.” Id. at 678. Additional support is found in HMSHost Corp. v. Frederic, 102 So. 3d 668 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). This court reversed the JCC’s finding that the E/C had not timely authorized a change in physician. Id. “The E/C’s informing Claimant of a particular doctor’s name within five days of receiving the request satisfied section 440.…
  • Archie v. State, 176 So. 3d 364 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015)
    …s no authority under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(Z) or Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.020(h) [9.020(i), as amended], for filing a motion for rehearing of an order [*368] denying a motion to withdraw plea[]."); see Grant v. State, 102 So. 3d 668, 668-69 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012). Only after the trial court denied Mr. Archie’s motion for rehearing did he file a notice of appeal challenging the denial of his motion for rehearing, a non-appealable order. In addition, the notice of appeal was filed o…

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