BILLY E. BAKER
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 3d DCA | 2026-06-10
No. 2026-0549
Lindsey, J., Lobree, J., Gooden, J.
2026 FL 7053 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2026)

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 petition for belated appeal must be sworn under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c)(4), and failure to do so renders the petition facially insufficient.


Headnotes

[1] A petition for belated appeal must be sworn in compliance with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c)(4), and failure to include a sworn verification renders the pe…

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

Billy E. Baker sought a belated appeal of the denial of his Rule 3.850 motion in a criminal case. His petition was filed without being sworn.…

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

Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed June 10, 2026. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

No. 3D26-0549

Lower Tribunal No. 18-CF-97-A-K

Billy E. Baker,

Petitioner,

VS.

State of Florida,

Respondent. A Case of Original Jurisdiction – Petition for Belated Appeal. Billy E. Baker, in proper person. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Yolande M. Samerson, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent. Before LINDSEY, LOBREE, and GOODEN, JJ. PER CURIAM. Petitioner Billy E. Baker seeks a belated appeal of the denial of his Rule 3.850 motion. But his petition was not sworn—as required by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(c)(4). And so, it is facially insufficient. Therefore, we deny the petition without prejudice to file a properly sworn petition. See Adams v. State, 302 So. 3d 851 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020); Green v. State, 941 So. 2d 1250 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006); Popp v. State, 935 So. 2d 93 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006). Denied without prejudice.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw