JEAN DESROSES
v.
STATE

Fla. 3d DCA | 2021-02-17
No. 20-1299
Froelich
46 Fla. L. Weekly D298 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2021) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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

An appeal challenging the denial of a writ of mandamus petition is properly dismissed as moot when the underlying controversy has been fully resolved by the time of appellate review.


Headnotes

[1] An appellate proceeding is subject to dismissal for mootness when the underlying controversy has been fully resolved such that appellate relief can have no actual effect…

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

Key Quotes

“An issue is moot when the controversy has been so fully resolved that a judicial determination can have no actual effect.”

The court cited Godwin v. State to establish the standard for mootness in appellate proceedings.

Facts & Procedural History

Jean Desroses appealed the trial court's denial of his petition for writ of mandamus. The controversy became moot because corrections to Desroses's se…

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

Opinion filed February 17, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D20-1299 Lower Tribunal No. 94-20024A

________________

Jean Desroses,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, et al.,

Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lourdes Simon, Judge. Jean Desroses, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General; Daniel R. Burke (Tallahassee), Assistant General Counsel, for appellees. Before EMAS, C.J., and LINDSEY, and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM.

Jean Desroses appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for writ of

mandamus.1 After review of the record before us, including the record before

us in 3D20-1763, referenced and incorporated herein by both parties, we

dismiss the instant appeal on the basis of mootness.2 See Godwin v. State,

593 So. 2d 211, 212 (Fla. 1992) (“An issue is moot when the controversy

has been so fully resolved that a judicial determination can have no actual

effect.” (citation omitted)); In re T.L. v. State, 35 So. 3d 1032 (Fla. 3d DCA

2010) (dismissing appeal as moot); Philip J. Padovano, 2 Fla. Prac.,

Appellate Practice § 1:4 (2019 ed.) (“An appellate proceeding is subject to

dismissal if the issues have become moot.”).

Appeal dismissed as moot.

Footnotes
1 After filing the notice of appeal in this case, Desroses appealed the denial of his “Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus and/or Motion for 3.800” in 3D20-1763. In that case, the lower court denied the petition as moot because corrections to Desroses’s sentence had already been made. This Court per curiam affirmed. Desroses v. State, 46 Fla. L. Weekly D298 (Fla. 3d DCA Feb. 3, 2021). 2 The State was not ordered to respond to the petition below in the instant case. In its Answer Brief, the Department of Corrections, on behalf of the State, noted: “Had the Department been ordered to respond by the trial court, the Department would have argued that the proper venue for the petition for writ of mandamus in this case as to its sentence calculation would be Leon County where the Department’s headquarters are located.”

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw