Thomas v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
The order here appealed, denying appellant’s claim for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, was entered in response to a letter which, under any reasonable interpretation, can be viewed only as an inquiry as to the manner of securing relief and not as a motion for relief.1 Accordingly, entry of the order was premature. Though not purporting to adjudicate the merits of appellant’s claim and, accordingly, not a bar to further proceedings, the premature order has apparently been viewed as conclusive of proceedings on a subsequent and ostensively sufficient motion.…
2Cited by6 opinions
- Gust v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
- Tillman v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1973
- Martinez v. FraxedasDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996
- Ferris v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1991
- Stokes v. Florida Dept. of CorrectionsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.