FRITZ MAJOR, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
The court held that the orders appealed were non-appealable, requiring dismissal for lack of jurisdiction.
The defendant filed motions for post-conviction relief and permission to appeal, which the trial court denied. The defendant appealed these denials.…
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 Appealability Of Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Fritz Major appeals the trial court’s “Order Denying Defendant’s Pro Se Motion Seeking Ruling On Motion To Appeal Denial Of Post Conviction Relief.” The defendant also appeals the trial court’s “Order Denying Defendant’s Pro Se Motion For Request For Permission To Appeal.”
Major filed a motion for post-conviction relief in the trial court. The trial court denied the motion on January 13, 2006 because all issues raised in the motion already had been litigated and considered by the trial court. Thus, the trial court denied the motion as successive.1 Major has never appealed the January 13, 2006 order, but instead filed a pro se “Motion for Request for Permission to Appeal in the trial court.” The trial court denied the motion. Major also filed a pro se “Motion Seeking a Ruling on Motion to Appeal Denial of Post Conviction Relief,” which the trial court also denied, as the motion had been ruled on.
Both of the orders on appeal before this Court are non-appealable orders under either Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130 or 9.110. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
. Furthermore, in case number 3D05-1242, we affirmed per curiam the trial court's denial of Major's first motion to correct illegal sentence, wherein he raised the exact same issues he raised before the trial court in this case.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Curry v. State, 16 So. 3d 933 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…On Motion to Enforce Mandate LAGOA, Judge. Gregory Curry (“Curry”) requests that this Court enforce the mandate issued in Curry v. State, 994 So. 2d 1109 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). For the following reasons, we deny Curry’s motion. On January 22, 1993, after a jury trial, Curry was convicted of armed robbery, in violation of section 812.13, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1992), and burglary of an occupied conveya…