ANTHONY M. WALKER, APPELLANT,
v.
WALTER A. MCNEIL, SECRETARY, FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed dismissal of pro se inmate's petition for extraordinary relief from prison disciplinary findings, holding that the petition was timely filed under the prison mailbox rule where the inmate's certificate of service showed placement with prison officials within the 30-day deadline.
A pro se inmate's petition for extraordinary relief is timely filed if the inmate places the document in the hands of an institution official for mailing within the deadline, as evidenced by a certificate of service.
[1] A pro se inmate's petition for extraordinary relief from prison disciplinary proceedings is timely filed when the inmate places the document in the hands of an institutio…
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“A document filed by a pro se inmate confined in an institution is timely filed if the inmate places the document in the hands of an institution official for mailing on or before the last day for filing. Such a document shall be presumed to be timely filed if it contains a certificate of service certifying that the inmate placed the document in the hands of an institution official for mailing on a particular date, and if the document would have been timely filed had it been received and file-stamped by the court on that date.”
Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.420(a)(2) establishing the prison mailbox rule for pro se inmates.
Appellant Walker filed an omnibus petition for extraordinary relief from prison disciplinary findings after exhausting administrative remedies with th…
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 Inmate Filing Rule cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant filed a joint “Omnibus Petition for Extraordinary Relief from Findings of Guilt in Prison Disciplinary Proceedings and Petition for Writ of Certiorari” after exhausting his available administrative remedies with the Department of Corrections. The trial court found it lacked jurisdiction and dismissed the petition as untimely, finding that more than 30 days had passed from the date that the Department filed its final denial of Appellant’s administrative appeal. Because Appellant’s petition contained a certificate of service stating that the petition was handed to prison officials for mailing on a date within the 30-day window of appeal, we reverse the trial court’s order dismissing Appellant’s petition. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.420(a)(2) (“A document filed by a pro se inmate confined in an institution is timely filed if the inmate places the document in the hands of an institution official for mailing on or before the last day for filing. Such a document shall be presumed to be timely filed if it contains a certificate of service certifying that the inmate placed the document in the hands of an institution official for mailing on a particular date, and if the document would have been timely filed had it been received and file-stamped by the court on that date.”); see also Ortiz v. Moore, 776 So. 2d 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
WEBSTER, VAN NORTWICK, and THOMAS, JJ., Concur.