JAMES FORNEY
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 4th DCA | 2018-02-28
No. 17-3854
238 So. 3d 839 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2018)

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.


Holding

A motion to disqualify a trial judge is ineffective and does not void subsequent orders when the movant fails to serve the motion on the judge as required by Florida Rules of Judicial Administration.


Headnotes

[1] A motion to disqualify a trial judge must be served on the judge to be effective, and failure to serve renders the motion ineffective and does not void subsequent court o…

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

Facts & Procedural History

Forney filed a successive Rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief in connection with a criminal conviction. He also filed a motion to disqualify …

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.


Opinion of the Court

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Ilona M. Holmes, Judge; L.T. Case No. 04-990 CF10A. James Forney, Raiford, pro se. No appearance required for appellee. PER CURIAM.

We affirm the summary denial of appellant’s successive rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. We write only to address appellant’s claim that the orders entered after he filed a motion to disqualify the trial judge were void. This claim is meritless because appellant failed to serve the motion on the judge. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin. 2.330(c), (j); Braddy v. State, 111 So. 3d 810, 833 (Fla. 2012); Hedrick v. State, 6 So. 3d 688, 693 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009). Affirmed. WARNER, CIKLIN and KUNTZ, JJ., concur. * * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw