Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

611 So. 2d 561

Sanders v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided December 29, 1992

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1992-12-29

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently January 2001

2 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1992-12-29

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION ON REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

¶2After denial of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, appellant retained counsel. Within the rehearing time, counsel filed a timely motion for extension of time to file a motion for rehearing. Counsel explained that he had just been retained and requested an extension of time to study the record and prepare a motion for rehearing. The motion was denied and appellant has appealed.

¶3We are unable to see a sound reason for denial of the motion for extension of time, and none has been suggested. The order under review is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to grant the motion for extension of time nunc pro tunc and for further proceedings on appellant’s motion for rehearing.

¶4Reversed and remanded.

/611/so2d/561 · .json · Public domain