WILLIE FRANK WILLIAMS, 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.
Appellant's appeal of a murder in the second degree conviction was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was filed more than thirty days after judgment, and no basis for habeas corpus relief existed.
An appeal filed more than thirty days after judgment is untimely and must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
[1] An appeal must be filed within thirty days of judgment or the appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review it.
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 intelligenceAppellant was indicted for murder in the first degree, withdrew his not guilty plea with counsel's advice, and entered a guilty plea to murder in the …
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 Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was indicted for murder in the first degree; with the advice of counsel, he withdrew a not guilty plea and entered a plea of guilty to the offense of murder in the second degree; he was sentenced to a term of imprisonment for twenty years and now seeks review of the judgment of conviction and sentence.
The judgment and sentence of which appellant seeks review was rendered by the court on April 24, 1970. The notice of appeal filed by appellant in proper person was filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Volusia County on May 27, 1970, more than thirty days from the rendition of the judgment. The appeal not being timely filed within the thirty days limited by law, this court does not have jurisdiction of the appeal and has no alternative but to dismiss it sua sponte.
For the purpose of determining whether appellant has a right to appellate review of his judgment of conviction and sentence by writ of habeas corpus under the doctrine set forth in Hollingshead v. Wainwright,1 we have reviewed the briefs filed by counsel for the parties as well as examined the record on appeal. We have determined that no basis for relief by way of habeas corpus exists in this case, but even if it did, the relief sought by appellant would be denied under the authority of Miller v. State2 and Hagans v. State.3
The appeal herein be and it is hereby dismissed.
CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Cleveland Hollingshead v. Louie L. Wainwright, 194 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1967)
- Miller v. State, 217 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)
- Hagans v. State, 212 So. 2d 79 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968)