GESUCLAIS BRUTUS, APPELLANT,
v.
MEARS TRANSPORTATION GROUP AND BRIDGEFIELD INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Finality Of Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
By notice of appeal filed May 5, 2010, the appellant seeks review of an order rendered November 30, 2007. Because the notice of appeal appeared untimely, this court directed the appellant to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed. The appellant has failed to respond to the show cause order. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See § 440.25(5)(a), Fla. Stat. (2007) (providing that orders of judges of compensation claims “shall become final 80 days after mailing of copies of such order to the parties” unless timely appealed); Fla. R.App. P. 9.180(b)(3) (providing this court’s jurisdiction is invoked if notice of appeal is filed within thirty days of rendition of order to be reviewed); see also, e.g., Metellus v. State, 900 So.2d 491, 495 (Fla.2005) (noting jurisdictional rule cannot be altered by court or by agreement of parties); Metro. Dade County v. Vasquez, 659 So.2d 355, 356 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (dismissing untimely appeal for lack of jurisdiction). All pending motions are denied as moot.
DISMISSED.
WOLF, ROBERTS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Drawdy, 136 So. 3d 1209 (Fla. 2014)…trict court certified that its decision is in direct conflict with the decision of the First District Court of Appeal in Roberts v. State, 39 So. 3d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), and the decisions of the Fifth District Court of Appeal in Murphy v. State, 49 So. 3d 295 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010), and Roughton v. State, 92 So. 3d 284 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons that follow, we quash the Second District’s decision and approve the decisions of the First and F…1 / 2
-
Drawdy v. State, 98 So. 3d 165 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…defendant’s penis with the victim’s vagina — and lewd or lascivious molestation— by touching her genitals or clothing covering them-in the same episode led to the conclusion that dual convictions did not violate double jeopardy. See Murphy v. State, 49 So. 3d 295, 298 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010), rev. granted, 79 So. 3d 745 (Fla.2012) (table decision) (citing Meshell, 2 So. 3d at 135).3 The Fifth District interpreted legislative intent to separately punish two crimes arising from a single act even more broadly in Ro…
-
Jacobs v. State, 272 So. 3d 838 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)
Authorities Cited
- State v. Mosley, 900 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 2004)
- Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Vasquez, 659 So. 2d 355 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)