DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, APPELLANT,
v.
NATALIE JESSICA-JANE BOND, 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 Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles appealed an order staying the suspension of a driver's license following a DUI arrest and refusal to submit to a blood test. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was filed more than 30 days after the stay order was entered, and a motion for rehearing does not toll the appellate filing deadline.
The appellate court lacks jurisdiction to review the case because the notice of appeal was untimely. A motion for rehearing of a non-final order does not suspend or toll the date of rendition of that order, and therefore does not extend the 30-day deadline for filing a notice of appeal.
[1] A motion for rehearing of a non-final order does not suspend the date of rendition of such an order for purposes of calculating the time to appeal.
[2] An appeal of a non-final order granting a stay must be filed within the prescribed time limits, and a motion for rehearing does not toll this period.
Previewing 2 of 4 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 motion for rehearing of a non-final order does not suspend the date of rendition of such an order.”
Establishes the legal rule that a motion for rehearing does not toll the appellate filing deadline for non-final orders.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNatalie Jessica-Jane Bond was arrested for driving under the influence in violation of section 316.193, Florida Statutes. After being informed of pena…
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 Stay Pending Review cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The State of Florida, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (DMV), appeals an order staying the suspension of appellee’s driving privileges.
Appellee was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI) in violation of section 316.193, Florida Statutes (1995). After being informed of the penalties for refusing to submit to a blood test, she refused, and her license was suspended for one year pursuant to section 322.2615, Florida Statutes (1995). Following administrative review, appellee petitioned for a writ of certiorari to the circuit court for review of the suspension order and for a stay pending review. The court granted the stay on January 17, 1997. On February 3, 1997, the DMV moved for rehearing, but the motion was denied on February 26, 1997. This appeal was filed on March 19, 1997.
Many questions are raised by the review being sought before this court: (1) whether the petition for stay should have been filed in the lower tribunal1, the DMV Bureau of Administrative Review; (2) whether a stay pending appeal may even be granted in view of the proscription of section 322.2615(13), Florida Statutes (1995); (3) whether review by this court is more appropriately sought by a petition for certiorari than by an appeal of a non-final order. All of those questions must go unanswered because we find that we have no jurisdiction to review this case because the appeal was untimely. The state filed its notice of appeal of the stay order more than 30 days after it was entered. A motion for rehearing of a non-final order does not suspend the date of rendition of such an order. Shelnutt v. Citrus County, 660 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995) (time for filing certiorari petition not tolled by motion for rehearing directed to interlocutory order); Coldwell Banker Commercial v. Wightman, 649 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). The request for review is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
DISMISSED.
HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur. GRIFFIN, C. J., concurs in result.
. Appellee states that she attempted to obtain a stay order from the DMV but received no response. That prompted her to seek a stay from the circuit court acting in its appellate capacity. Perhaps mandamus to require the DMV to rule on the motion would have been appropriate under Florida Rule of Appellee Procedure 9.030(c)(3).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Denley Ann Bodkin v. Sweeney, 805 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…ntimely. Ms. Bodkin filed her appeal more than thirty days after the nonfinal order was rendered. A motion for rehearing of a nonfinal order does not suspend the date of rendition of such an order. Dep’t of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Bond, 696 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal in case number 2D00-2443. Ms. Bodkin has not provided a record to support her argument that the circuit court erred in its award of child support in case number 2D00-2754. Without an adequate…
-
Jones v. The Pantry, Inc., 866 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…court’s interlocutory orders denying petitioner’s motions. Because a motion for reconsideration does not toll the time for filing a certiorari petition directed to an interlocutory order, see Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles v. Bond, 696 So. 2d 949 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997), we dismiss the petition for lack of jurisdiction. We also deny petitioner’s request for disqualification of the judges from the Eighth Judicial Circuit. BOOTH, KAHN and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Rose v. State, 649 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Domanico v. State, 660 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)
- Shelnutt v. Citrus Cnty., 660 So. 2d 393 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995)