RYAN ANDREW CONOVER
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Mandamus does not lie to review a trial court's ruling for legal error, and certiorari was the proper but time-barred remedy for challenging the order striking the self-defense immunity motion.
[1] Mandamus is not an appropriate remedy to review a trial court's ruling for legal error or to compel the court to rule in a particular manner; certiorari is the proper veh…
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“Mandamus does not lie to review a trial court's ruling for legal error or to compel the court to rule in a certain way.”
Court explaining the fundamental limitation on mandamus jurisdiction
Conover sought a writ of mandamus to challenge a trial court order striking his motion to dismiss based on self-defense immunity under Florida Statute…
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 Self-Defense Immunity cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this petition for writ of mandamus, the petitioner seeks review of an order striking his motion to dismiss asserting a claim of immunity under section 776.032, Florida Statutes, as untimely under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.190(c). Mandamus does not lie to review a trial court’s ruling for legal error or to compel the court to rule in a certain way. Smith v. Lambdin, 971 So. 2d 209, 210 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125, 131 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015). A petition for writ of certiorari would have been the proper vehicle to seek review of the trial court’s ruling. See Jefferson v. State, 264 So. 3d 1019, 1023 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018); Rogers v. State, 301 So. 3d 1083, 1083-84 (Fla. 1st DCA 2020); Casanova v. State, 335 So. 3d 1231, 1232 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021); Corbett v. State, No. 5D21-3166, 2022 WL 1509106, at *2 (Fla. 5th DCA May 13, 2022). However, we lack jurisdiction to consider the petition as a petition for writ of certiorari because it was filed more than thirty days after rendition of the trial court’s order. Fla. R. App. P. 9.020(h), 9.100(c)(1); see also Decktight Roofing Servs., Inc. v. Amwest Sur. Ins., 841 So. 2d 667, 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003).
Petition dismissed.
DAMOORGIAN, CIKLIN and LEVINE, JJ., concur.
* * *
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nadell v. Apachula B. Hursey, 363 So. 3d 1135 (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)…on the basis of an affirmative defense. We have found it properly issued where a motion in a criminal case because the trial court erred in determining that the petitioner’s SYG motion must be sworn and rely on record evidence); Casanova v. State, 335 So. 3d 1231, 1232 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (same). Because Nadell’s petition, though, raises no procedural issue regarding how the trial court conducted the evidentiary hearing on his SYG Motion, and contests only the trial court’s merits determination in the challen…
-
Nicol Maslo v. State, 390 So. 3d 720 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)…opinion, we express our agreement with the series of cases holding that procedural errors regarding Stand Your Ground motions should be raised in a petition for writ of certiorari rather than a petition for writ of prohibition.”); Casanova v. State, 335 So. 3d 1231, 1232 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (“[B]ecause the trial court erred in its construction of the Stand Your Ground statute, we are unable to determine whether [the movant] is entitled to immunity on the merits. Thus, prohibition is not the appropriate vehicle…
-
Edwards v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2022)…cient prima facie claim of justifiable use of force under chapter 776 in a motion to dismiss . . . and present argument in support of that motion at a pretrial immunity hearing” (quoting Jefferson, 264 So. 3d at 1028–29); see also Casanova v. State, 335 So. 3d 1231, 1232 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (holding that a motion to dismiss can raise a facially sufficiently claim of immunity “even though the motion to dismiss is not sworn to by someone with personal knowledge or supported by evidence or testimony establishing t…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gawker Media, LLC v. Bollea, 170 So. 3d 125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)
- Jefferson v. State, 264 So. 3d 1019 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018)
- Decktight Roofing Servs., Inc. v. Amwest Sur. Ins., 841 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)
- Smith v. Lambdin, 971 So. 2d 209 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)