RICHARD JACKSON, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Florida appellate court reversed denial of postconviction relief motion, holding that the motion was timely filed under the mailbox rule, which deems a pro se inmate's document filed when delivered to prison authorities for mailing.
A pro se inmate's postconviction relief motion is timely filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 when delivered to prison authorities for mailing, even if received by the court later, under the mailbox rule.
[1] Under the mailbox rule, a pro se inmate's postconviction relief motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 is deemed filed when the inmate delivers it to priso…
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“Under the mailbox rule, a notice is deemed filed when it is delivered to prison authorities for mailing.”
Court explaining the mailbox rule standard for determining when a pro se inmate's document is considered filed.
Richard Jackson filed a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court denied the motion as untimely…
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 Timeliness Of Filing cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendant, Richard Jackson, appeals from the denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 based on the trial court’s determination that the motion was untimely. ' Because the record before this Court demonstrates that the motion was timely filed within the two-year time limit provided by rule 3.850 based on the “mailbox rule,” we reverse the order denying the defendant’s motion for postconviction relief and remand for consideration on the merits. See Griffin v. Sistuenck, 816 So.2d 600, 601 (Fla.2002) (“Under the mailbox rule, a notice' is deemed filed when it is delivered to prison authorities for mailing.”); Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614, 617 (Fla.1992) (holding that under the “mailbox rule” a pro se inmate’s document is “deemed filed at the moment in time when the inmate loses control over the document by entrusting its further delivery or processing,” which is usually when “the inmate places the document in the hands of prison officials”); Lawson v. State, 107 So.3d 1228, 1229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) (quoting Pagan v. State, 899 So.2d 1203, 1204 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)) (“[Hinder the mailbox rule, a pro se inmate’s document is deemed filed when the inmate entrusts the document to prison officials for further delivery or processing.”).
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Thurston McCLAIN, 591 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 1992)
- Haag v. State, 591 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 1992)
- Griffin v. D.R. Sistuenck, 816 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2002)
- Pagan v. State, 899 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Lawson v. State, 107 So. 3d 1228 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)