STANLEY WINCHESTER, APPELLANT,
v.
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 a letter filed nearly two months after the denial of a motion to vacate a plea, and three months after the order denying the motion, is an untimely notice of appeal.
Appellant filed a letter to the presiding judge nearly two months after an order denying his motion to vacate his plea. The notice of appeal was filed…
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 Motion To Vacate Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
Stanley Winchester appeals from an order treating his letter to the presiding judge as a motion for rehearing as to the denial of his rule 3.170(£) motion to vacate plea, and denying it. The undated letter was filed nearly two months after the date of entry of the order denying the motion to withdraw plea, on April 27, 2009. The notice of appeal was filed1 three months after that date.
In his initial brief, Winchester asks this court to consider the letter to be a rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. We decline to do so, and instead dismiss the appeal as untimely. See Bridges v. State, 863 So.2d 366 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (dismissing appeal for lack of jurisdiction because notice of appeal was not timely; *919defendant’s pro se letter requesting reconsideration of order denying motion to withdraw plea was unauthorized).
Dismissed.
WARNER, HAZOURI and LEVINE, JJ., concur.