Legal Opinion

Hardy v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 30, 2016No. 2D15-5625Published

1Opinion of the Court

SILBERMAN, Judge.

Arthur Hardy filed a timely motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 raising seven claims. The postconviction court found the third claim to be facially insufficient and afforded Mr. Hardy sixty days to amend, as required by rule 3.850(e). The postconviction court informed Mr. Hardy that the order was nonfinal and that he “may not appeal until such time as a Final Order has been rendered.” See Havens v. State, 27 So.3d 803, 804 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010) (“An order dismissing a motion for postconviction relief that also provides leave to…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Christner v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008
  2. Herron v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010
  3. Havens v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API