RONALD MCPHERSON, 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.
A pro se inmate's motion is timely if given to corrections officials for mailing on or before the filing deadline.
McPherson was sentenced on July 17, 2013. He gave corrections officials a motion to modify his sentence on September 16, 2013. The sixtieth day 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 Motion To Modify Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioner Ronald McPherson seeks cer-tiorari review of the trial court’s order denying his motion to modify sentence as untimely. The State could not show cause why the petition shouldn’t be granted. For the following reasons, we grant Mr. McPherson’s petition.
On July 17, 2013, Mr. McPherson was found guilty on two counts of burglary of a conveyance and sentenced to five years in prison. On September 16, 2013, he gave corrections officials a motion for modification or reduction of his sentence for filing with the court. Under the “Mailbox Rule,” a document filed by a pro se inmate is timely if placed in the hands of an institution official for mailing on or before the last day for filing. See Thompson v. State, 761 So.2d 324, 326 (Fla.2000). The Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure require that motions to modify or reduce a sentence be filed within sixty days after imposition. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.800(c). The sixtieth day from July 17, 2013, was Sunday, September 15, 2013. Pursuant to the Florida Rules of Judicial Administration, the filing deadline rolls to the next business day — Monday, September 16, 2013 — the same day that Mr. McPherson gave his motion to corrections officials. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.514(a)(1)(C). Because Mr. McPherson placed his motion in the hands of corrections officials on the last day of the period, it must be considered timely filed.
We GRANT the Petition for Writ of Certiorari, QUASH the Order Denying Defendant’s Motion for Modification or Reduction of Sentence, and REMAND the matter for consideration of Mr. McPherson’s motion on the merits.
LEWIS, C.J., THOMAS, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Conrad v. State, 148 So. 3d 148 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…uit court departs from the essential requirements of law when it dismisses a timely rule 3.800(c) motion without considering the merits of the motion. See, e.g., id. at 616; Kwapil v. State, 44 So. 3d 229, 230 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); McPherson v. State, 139 So. 3d 478, 479 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014). As the sixtieth day following the imposition of her sentence was Saturday, August 24, 2013, Conrad’s motion was timely filed when she placed it in the hands of prison officials on Monday, August 26, 2013. See Fla. R. Jud. A…
Authorities Cited
- Thompson v. State, 761 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 2000)