CHRISTAN STARKES, 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.
Starkes's rule 3.850 motions were timely because the two-year deadline did not begin until the appellate mandate issued in March 2015, not from the original conviction date in 2012.
The two-year deadline for filing a rule 3.850 motion begins when the appellate mandate issues, not when the conviction becomes final, if the defendant appeals the conviction.
[1] When a defendant appeals a conviction, the two-year deadline for filing a rule 3.850 postconviction motion begins when the appellate mandate issues, not when the convicti…
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 intelligenceStarkes was convicted on May 3, 2012, and appealed. This court affirmed and issued the mandate in March 2015. Starkes filed rule 3.850 motions in Apri…
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 Issuance Of Mandate cases and more on FLexlaw
Christan Starkes appeals the denial of his original and supplemental rule 3.850 motions. The motions, filed in April and May 2016; challenged convictions entered on May 3, 2012, The trial court concluded the rule 3.850 motions were filed more than two years after the convictions became final, meaning they were untimely. See. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(b) (establishing two-year deadline). But because Starkes appealed the two convictions (see Case No. 1D13-4795), the clock did not start running until this court affirmed and the mandate issued in March 2015. See Knowles v. State, 41 So.3d 332, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010). Thus, Starkes’s rule 3.850 motions were timely filed in 2016. We therefore reverse and remand so that the trial court can address the motions on their merits.*
REVERSED and REMANDED.
B.L. THOMAS, C.J., and OSTERHAUS and WINSOR,' JJ., CONCUR.