JAMES JOSEPH RICHARDSON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
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 Florida Supreme Court denied the State's motion to dismiss Richardson's death sentence appeal as untimely. The court held that the notice of appeal was timely filed because the circuit judge properly extended the time for filing a motion for new trial from four to fifteen days, making the subsequent appeal within the 90-day filing deadline.
The appeal was timely. The circuit judge's extension of the motion for new trial deadline from four days to fifteen days was properly recognized, making June 17, 1968 the last day for filing the motion for new trial. The notice of appeal filed September 16, 1968, was therefore filed within the 90-day appeal deadline.
“It therefore appears that the motion for new trial having been filed June 17, 1968 was timely filed. Therefore, the notice of appeal filed September 16, 1968, within 90 days from the date the motion for new trial was denied, was timely filed.”
The court's holding establishing that the appeal was timely despite the initial appearance that the deadline had passed, based on proper extension of the motion for new trial deadline.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRichardson was sentenced to death on May 31, 1968. The circuit judge extended the time for filing a motion for new trial from four days to fifteen day…
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 Timeliness Of Notice Of Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
A motion has been made in this cause to dismiss the appeal because it was not timely
The judgment and sentence of death in this cause was entered May 31, 1968. While the record proper fails to establish the fact, according to an affidavit filed in this cause by the circuit judge who presided in the trial of the appellant said circuit judge did on the 31st day of May, 1968 extend the time for filing a motion for new trial from four days to fifteen days.1 This would make June 17, 1968 the last day for filing a motion for new trial.2 This is so because the 15th day did fall on Saturday, June 15, 1968. It therefore appears that the motion for new trial having been filed June 17, 1968 was timely filed. Therefore, the notice of appeal filed September 16, 1968, within 90 days from the date the motion for new trial was denied, was timely filed.3
Upon consideration of the foregoing, the motion of the State of Florida to dismiss the appeal is denied.
CALDWELL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and ERVIN, JJ-, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Soloff v. U-Totem, 257 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 1971)…laimant’s disability to 75 per cent of the body as a whole. The Judge retained the 30 per cent/70 per cent apportionment. This Order was reversed by the Industrial Relations Commission, and this Court denied certiorari. (Soloff v. U-Totem, Fla.1968, 216 So. 2d 2) Subsequently, claimant suffered two additional heart attacks, one in December 1967 and the other in December 1968. Claimant then filed another petition for modification. The Judge of Industrial Claims found claimant had “suffered a [*32] change of…