Witt v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the CourtMonaco, J.
The appellant, Omar Sharif Witt, appeals the summary denial of his rule 3.850 motion based on the trial court’s determination that the motion was not timely filed. We conclude, however, that the motion was timely, and that Mr. Witt is entitled to a substantive consideration of his motion.
When Mr. Witt appealed his conviction of a number of felony offenses, this court issued a written opinion affirming the judgment and sentence. See Witt v. State, 780 So.2d 946 (Fla. 5th DCA), review denied, 799 So.2d 220 (Fla.2001). The trial court observed that the mandate that issued from this court was…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Huff v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1990
- Beaty v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1997
- Perkins v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
- Cargle v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
- Witt v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- MONFISTON v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011
- Maxwell v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004