OSCAR W. TUCKER, JR., PETITIONER,
v.
LOUIE L. WAINWRIGHT, DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF ADULT CORRECTIONS, STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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 petition for writ of habeas corpus is discharged because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.
Petitioner sought appellate review of an order denying his motion under Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850. His notice of appeal was filed with the clerk o…
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 Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850 cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioner contends that he is entitled to a full appellate review by way of habeas corpus of an order of the trial court denying his motion under Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850, 33 F.S.A. under the authority of Baggett v. Wainwright, Fla.1969, 229 So.2d 239.
The respondent’s return and the record in this cause conclusively show that the petitioner’s notice of appeal whereby he sought review of the order denying relief under Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850 was not filed within 30 days from the rendition of said order. The notice of appeal was dated on the 29th day from the rendition of the order; the envelope containing the notice of appeal was postmarked on the 30th day, and the clerk of the lower court received the same on the 33rd day after rendition of the order.
There is no allegation that the State in any way had anything to do with the notice of appeal being received by the clerk of the lower court after the 30-day appeal time established by the appellate rules. All of petitioner’s allegations of State actions depriving him of his right to appeal are actions which occurred subsequent to the expiration of the 30 days in which to perfect an appeal.
For the foregoing reasons the petition for writ of habeas corpus is discharged.
HOBSON, C. J., and PIERCE and Mc-NULTY, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Haag v. State, 591 So. 2d 614 (Fla. 1992)…district courts in Lindsay v. State, 579 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), Ruggirello v. State, 566 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA), review dismissed, 569 So. 2d 1280 (Fla.1990), Clifford v. State, 513 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), and Tucker v. Wainwright, 235 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970), contain re- [*618] suits or analyses inconsistent with our views and accordingly are disapproved to the extent that they conflict with this opinion. We also are receding from Walker v. Wainwright, 303 So. 2d 321 (Fla.1974), and S…
-
Sparre v. State, 164 So. 3d 1183 (Fla. 2015)…district courts in Lindsay v. State, 579 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991), Ruggirello v. State, 566 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA), review dismissed, 569 So. 2d 1280 (Fla.1990), Clifford v. State, 513 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987), and Tucker v. Wainwright, 235 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970), contain results or analyses incon [*1199] sistent with our views and accordingly are disapproved to the extent that they conflict with this opinion. We also are receding from Walker v. Wainwright, 303 So. 2d 321 (Fla.1974), and S…
-
Walker v. Louie L. Wainwright, 303 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1974)…, DEKLE and OVERTON, JJ., concur. . Frizzell v. State, 238 So. 2d 67 (Fla.1970). . 404 U.S. 443, 92 S.Ot. 589, 30 L.Ed.2d 592 (1972). .Mitchell v. Wainwright, 155 So. 2d 868 (Fla.1963). .State ex rel. Ervin v. Smith, 160 So. 2d 518 (Fla.1964). .235 So. 2d 38 (Fla.App.1970).…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Baggett v. Louie L. Wainwright, 229 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1969)