AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 3.850(G)
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 amends Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850(g) to allow filing of a belated appeal from denial of a postconviction relief motion where counsel neglects to timely file an appeal despite the petitioner's timely request, implementing its prior holdings in Williams v. State and Steele v. Kehoe.
Rule 3.850(g) is amended to explicitly allow a petitioner to seek a belated appeal upon allegation that the petitioner timely requested counsel to appeal the order denying postconviction relief and counsel, through neglect, failed to do so.
[1] A belated appeal from the denial of a motion for postconviction relief may be permitted when counsel neglects to file a timely appeal despite a timely request by the peti…
[2] A rule amendment may allow for a belated appeal from the denial of a 3.850 motion where counsel fails to file a timely appeal after a timely request by the petitioner.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 petitioner may seek a belated appeal upon the allegation that the petitioner timely requested counsel to appeal the order denying petitioner's motion for postconviction relief and counsel, through neglect, failed to do so.”
The core holding of the amendment, establishing the standard for allowing belated appeals in 3.850 cases.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Court had previously decided Williams v. State and Steele v. Kehoe, establishing that petitioners should be able to file belated appeals when coun…
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 Belated Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In accordance with our decision in Williams v. State, 111 So. 2d 947 (Fla.2000), extending our holding in Steele v. Kehoe, 747 So. 2d 931 (Fla.1999), to allow the filing of a belated appeal from the denial of a 3.850 motion where counsel neglects to timely file an appeal despite a timely request by the petitioner, we hereby amend rule 3.850(g) to include the following additional language (the new language is indicated by underlining):
(g) Appeal; Rehearing; Service on Movant. An appeal may be taken to the appropriate appellate court from the order entered on the motion as from a final judgment on application for writ of habeas corpus. All orders denying motions for postconviction relief shall include a statement that the movant has the right to appeal within 30 days of the rendition of the order. A petitioner may seek a belated appeal upon the allegation that the petitioner timely requested counsel to appeal the order denying petitioner’s motion for postconviction relief and counsel, through neglect, failed to do so. The movant may file a motion for rehearing of any order denying a motion under this rule within 15 days of the date of service of the order. The clerk of the court shall promptly serve on the movant a copy of any order denying a motion for postconviction relief or denying a motion for rehearing noting thereon the date of service by an appropriate certificate of service.
This provision shall become effective immediately upon the filing of this opinion. We direct that this rule amendment be published in the next edition of The Florida Bar News. Any interested person may file a comment with the Court on or before January 15, 2001.
It is so ordered.
WELLS, C.J., and SHAW, HARDING, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, LEWIS and QUINCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnston v. State, 27 So. 3d 11 (Fla. 2010)…standard to be used in reviewing ineffective assistance of counsel claims, Johnston filed another petition for writ of habeas corpus in this Court, arguing that Stephens should apply retroactively to his case. Relief was denied in Johnston v. Moore, 789 So. 2d 262, 263 (Fla.2001). In June 2002, Johnston filed a third motion to vacate judgment of conviction and sentence, asserting that he is mentally retarded and that his execution would violate his constitutional rights under the holding of the United States…
-
Chandler v. Crosby, 916 So. 2d 728 (Fla. 2005)…Court has entertained successive habeas corpus petitions brought by capital defendants raising a variety of issues, including challenging (a) the erroneous standard of review applied by this Court in prior rule 3.850 appeals, see Johnston v. Moore, 789 So. 2d 262 (Fla.2001) (concluding that Stephens v. State, 748 So. 2d 1028 (Fla.1999), was not retroactive under Witt v. State, 387 So. 2d 922 (Fla.1980)); (b) the constitutionality of an inmate’s stay on death row and of the clemency process, see King v. State…
-
Bunkley v. State, 833 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 2002)…g., Ferguson v. State, 789 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 2001) (applying retroactively Carter v. State, 706 So. 2d 873 (Fla.1997), wherein the Court held that a judicial determination of competency is required in certain postconviction cases); Johnston v. Moore, 789 So. 2d 262 (Fla.2001) (declining to apply retroactively Stephens v. State, 748 So. 2d 1028 (Fla.1999), wherein the Court announced a revised standard of review for ineffectiveness claims); Mitchell v. Moore, 786 So. 2d 521 (Fla.2001) (applying retroactively th…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Steele v. Kehoe, 747 So. 2d 931 (Fla. 1999)