JETHRO THOMPKINS, PETITIONER,
v.
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.
A defendant's sworn petition for belated appeal will be granted without an evidentiary hearing if the state's response fails to provide a good faith basis for disputing the allegations.
[1] A sworn petition alleging that defense counsel agreed to process an appeal but failed to do so is facially sufficient to warrant granting a belated appeal.
[2] A state's response to a petition for belated appeal is insufficient to require an evidentiary hearing if it fails to provide a good faith basis for disputing the petition…
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 intelligenceJethro Thompkins sought a belated appeal of his conviction, alleging his counsel failed to process it. The state responded by detailing unsuccessful a…
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.
We deny rehearing, but withdraw this court’s March 10, 2004 opinion granting Thompkins a belated appeal and substitute the following opinion.
Jethro Thompkins seeks belated appeal of his April 30, 2003 conviction and sentence. Thompkins’s sworn petition alleges defense counsel agreed to process the appeal but did not do so. The state was ordered to show cause why the petition should not be granted. The state’s response indicates that it was unable to contact trial counsel and requests that a commissioner be appointed to make factual findings.
The state explains that, in response to our order to show cause, calls were made to defense counsel on January 22, 2004 and January 27, 2004. While each time a message was left, the content of the messages was not disclosed. Defense counsel returned the January 27th call that same day and left a message for the assigned assistant attorney general. The state then called back on January 28, 2004, the same day the state filed its response to this petition, and left another message. It would appear, therefore, that the attorneys engaged in the commonly know experience of “phone tag.”
We deem this response, without more, insufficient to require an evidentiary hearing and conclude that the state has failed to raise a good faith basis for disputing Thompkins’s sworn allegations. “Absent a showing in the state’s response of a good faith basis for opposing a facially sufficient petition, belated appeal will be granted without appointment of a commissioner.” Reese v. State, 743 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). See also State v. Trowell, 739 So. 2d 77, 81 (Fla.1999); Wessells v. State, 737 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Schubert v. State, 737 So. 2d 1102, 1103 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Denson v. State, 710 So. 2d 144, 145 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998). But see Oliver v. State, 834 So. 2d 910, 911-12 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)(suggest-ing that a state’s allegation that defense counsel could not be reached is sufficient to warrant an evidentiary hearing).
Accordingly, belated appeal is granted.
STONE, KLEIN and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Trowell, 739 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 1999)
- Denson v. State, 710 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)
- Schubert v. State, 737 So. 2d 1102 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Wessells v. State, 737 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- Oliver v. State, 834 So. 2d 910 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)
- Reese v. State, 743 So. 2d 1104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)