DAWN KIRKCONNELL
v.
STATE
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 denied Kirkconnell's appeal of the trial court's dismissal of her Rule 3.800(c) motion to reduce sentence as untimely, holding that the sixty-day filing deadline is jurisdictional and cannot be extended.
The sixty-day filing deadline for Rule 3.800(c) motions to reduce or modify sentence is jurisdictional, and a trial court properly denies such motions filed after that period expires.
[1] A circuit court order dismissing a Rule 3.800(c) motion as untimely may be reviewed by petition for writ of certiorari in the district court, even though an order denying…
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 intelligenceKirkconnell's sentence was imposed on February 12, 2020. She filed her Rule 3.800(c) motion to reduce or modify her sentence on June 16, 2020, more th…
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 Motion To Reduce Or Modify Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
HENDON, J.
Dawn Kirkconnell appeals from the trial court’s denial of her motion to reduce or modify her sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c). Rule 3.800(c) provides that, where no direct appeal has been filed, “[a] court may reduce or modify to include any of the provisions of chapter 948, Florida Statutes, a legal sentence imposed by it, sua sponte, or upon motion filed, within [sixty] days after the imposition.” Ms. Kirkconnell’s sentence was entered on February 12, 2020, and by the time Ms. Kirkconnell filed her rule 3.800(c) motion on June 16, 2020, the sixty-day time period in which to file had expired. The trial court accordingly denied her 3.800(c) motion to mitigate because it was untimely filed more than sixty days after imposition of sentence. “[T]he sixty-day requirement of Rule 3.800(c) is jurisdictional,” and “[t]he trial court properly denie[s] [a defendant’s] motion as untimely [where] it was filed more than sixty days from the date his sentence was imposed.” Hernandez v. State, 109 So. 3d 865, 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013); Berki v. State, 298 So. 3d 1169 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (dismissing the appeal, as the lower tribunal's order denying, on the merits, a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) motion to mitigate sentence is not an appealable order) (citations omitted). However, a circuit court order dismissing a rule 3.800(c) motion as untimely may be reviewed by petition for writ of certiorari in the district court. Kwapil v. State, 44 So. 3d 229, 230 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010); Velazquez v. State, 917 So. 2d 306, 306 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Because the 2 trial court did not deny Kirkconnell’s petition on the merits, we treat the appeal as a petition for certiorari, and deny the same. See Montesino v. State, 231 So. 3d 514 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017); Hernandez v. State, 109 So. 3d 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). Petition denied.
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Kwapil v. State, 44 So. 3d 229 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
- Velazquez v. State, 917 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Hernandez v. State, 109 So. 3d 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013)
- Montesino v. State, 231 So. 3d 514 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)
- Viktor Berki v. State, 298 So. 3d 1169 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)