Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

210 So. 2d 472

Wingard v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1968-05-17

Relies on 175 So. 2d 243 - Smith v. State · Young v. State · Desrosiers v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1968-05-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently February 1986

9 state decisions

60196819701980decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PER CURIAM.

¶1Petitioner is appealing from the summary denial of his Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1 motion. In order to obtain post-conviction relief under Rule No. 1 (now R.Cr.P. 1.850, 33 F.S.A.), it is necessary that one seeking such relief be in custody by virtue of the sentence appealed from. An appeal from a judgment denying a motion for post-conviction relief under Rule No. 1 becomes moot upon completion of the service of the sentence. Desrosiers v. State, Fla.App.1966, 189 So.2d 834; Smith v. State, Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d 243; Young v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 622. It appears from the record that the sentence appealed from has already expired. Accordingly, petitioner’s appeal must be dismissed.

LILES, C. J., and ALLEN and PIERCE, JJ., concur.
/210/so2d/472 · .json · Public domain