ANDREW BRADLEY LAVERS, 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 affirmed the probation revocation and sentence but dismissed the appeal of the denial of the motion for reconsideration.
Andrew Bradley Lavers sought review of an order revoking his probation, the resulting sentence, and an order denying his motion for reconsideration. T…
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 Anders Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
In this Anders1 appeal, Andrew Bradley Lavers seeks review of the order revoking his probation, the resulting sentence, and the order denying his motion for reconsideration of that sentence filed under. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c). We affirm the revocation of Lavers’ probation and sentence without comment.
However, “[o]rders denying relief under rule 3.800(c) are not renewable by appeal.” Seward v. State, 912 So.2d 389, 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Such an order is reviewable by way of certiorari if the trial court erroneously determines that the motion was untimely. See id. Here, the trial court denied Lavers’ motion on the merits. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal insofar as Lavers seeks review of the order denying his rule 3.800(c) motion. See Adams v. State, 800 So.2d 741, 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
Affirmed in part, dismissed in part.
CRENSHAW and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marlyn Tracey v. Wells Fargo Bank, 264 So. 3d 1152 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)…majority's decision effectively recedes from Sas v. Federal National Mortgage Ass'n, 112 So. 3d 778 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013) ; Wolkoff v. American Home Mortgage Servicing, Inc., 153 So. 3d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) ; Evans v. HSBC Bank, USA, National Ass'n, 223 So. 3d 1059 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017) ; and the full line of cases that follow these decisions without consideration by the full court en banc. Florida courts have consistently adhered to a clear standard in determining the scope of remand in foreclosure cases. In Ev…1 / 2
-
Rigby v. Bank OF NEW York Mellon, 228 So. 3d 183 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…e was no evidence that a loan was included in a pooling and service agreement).2 As a result of the improperly admitted evidence I would reverse the final judgment of foreclosure and remand for a new trial. See Evans v. HSBC Bank, USA, Nat’l Ass’n, 223 So. 3d 1059, 2017 WL 1829484 (Fla. 2d DCA May 5, 2017); Miller v. Bank of America, N.A., 201 So. 3d 1286 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016); Helton v. Bank of America, N.A., 187 So. 3d 245 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016). . Other recent cases from the Fourth District hold a predecessor'…
-
Herman v. Ewers (Fla. 4th DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Adams v. State, 800 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
- Seward v. State, 912 So. 2d 389 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)