JOHN C. HORNER, 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.
John C. Horner sought a writ of mandamus to compel the Osceola County circuit court to rule on his Rule 3.850 postconviction relief motion, which had been pending for over two years. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District, granted the petition and issued a writ, directing the circuit court to enter a final order within forty-five days.
Mandamus lies to compel a trial court to rule on a motion or petition within a reasonable time. Because Horner's motion had been pending for over two years, an unreasonable delay was established, warranting the issuance of a writ of mandamus to compel the circuit court to enter a final order within forty-five days.
[1] Mandamus lies to compel a trial court to rule on a motion or petition within a reasonable time.
[2] A petitioner establishes an unreasonable delay in obtaining a ruling on a motion when the motion has been pending for over two years.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“Mandamus lies to compel a trial court to rule on a motion or petition within a reasonable time.”
Establishes the legal standard for when mandamus is an appropriate remedy to compel a trial court to rule on pending matters.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHorner filed a timely Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief on December 29, 2015. The circuit court issued a show cause order on October 25, 201…
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 Unreasonable Delay cases and more on FLexlaw
John C. Horner filed a petition for writ of mandamus, seeking to compel the circuit court of the Ninth Judicial Circuit, Osceola County, to rule on his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. Horner's timely motion was provided to prison officials for mailing on December 29, 2015. Four weeks later, Horner amended ground one of his motion. On October 25, 2016, the circuit court entered an order directing the State to show cause within sixty days why Horner was not entitled to relief on his motion or to "otherwise [frame the] issues in the event that a hearing on the motion is warranted." On March 30, 2017, the State filed its response,1 arguing that Horner's motion should be summarily denied.
On July 13, 2017, Horner filed a "motion to expedite ruling," requesting that the circuit court adjudicate his rule 3.850 motion within thirty days and advising that if the court failed to do so, he would seek mandamus relief. Having received no ruling on his motion, on October 30, 2017, Horner filed the instant petition for writ of mandamus with this court, requesting that this court issue an order compelling the circuit court to rule on his pending motion for postconviction relief. On November 1, 2017, this court entered an order directing the State and the circuit judge assigned to the case to respond by December 18, 2017. On the last day to respond, the State filed a motion for an extension of time to respond "due to scheduling conflict." We granted the request and entered a separate order directing that a response to the petition now be filed by January 17, 2018. On January 16, 2018, the State moved for a second extension of time based on an unelaborated scheduling conflict.2
"Mandamus lies to compel a trial court to rule on a motion or petition within a reasonable time." Diaz v. State , 1 So.3d 337, 338 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) ; accord Johnson v. State , 938 So.2d 639, 640 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) ; Matthews v. Circuit Ct. , 515 So.2d 1065 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987). As his rule 3.850 motion has now been pending for over two years, Horner has clearly established an unreasonable delay in obtaining a ruling on his motion. See Barroso v. State , 19 So.3d 441 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009). While we are sympathetic to the large caseloads assigned to Florida's circuit judges,3 we are concerned that the present failure to rule on Horner's motion is unduly impairing his right of access to the courts.
Accordingly, due to the length of the delay, we direct that the circuit judge to whom this matter is assigned enter a final order on Horner's rule 3.850 motion within forty-five days following the issuance of this opinion.
*1179PETITION GRANTED; WRIT ISSUED.
SAWAYA, ORFINGER, and LAMBERT, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Tuggerson v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (M.D. Fla. 2025)…ting 28 U.S.C. § 2244(d)(1)(B)). The postconviction court's failure to rule on the motion for extension of time does not violate federal law. Tuggerson may compel a ruling by filing a mandamus petition in the state appellate court. Horner v. State, 236 So. 3d 1177, 1178 (Fla. 5th DCA 2018). See Lindsey v. Storey, 936 F.2d 554, 561 (11th Cir. 1991) (holding that no procedural due process violation occurs if a state provides a "meaningful postdeprivation remedy"). Also, despite the postconviction court's failur…
Authorities Cited
- Phillips v. State, 938 So. 2d 639 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- Matthews v. Cir. Court, 515 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Hampton Alonzo Corry v. State, 515 So. 2d 1065 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987)
- Barroso v. State, 19 So. 3d 441 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)
- Scotty Santos Diaz v. State, 1 So. 3d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)
- Spickerman v. State, 1 So. 3d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)