Legal Opinion

Jones v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided July 29, 2005No. 5D03-4183PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

2Per curiam

We elect to treat Jones’ petition for reinstatement due to newly discovered evidence as a motion for rehearing, and deny it. There are two reasons for our denial: 1) it is untimely, having been filed 33 days after this court’s order dismissing the original petition; and 2) it is improper to raise new issues in a motion for rehearing as this motion attempts to do. See Araujo v. State, 452 So.2d 54 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).

Because of Jones’ numerous filings in this court, we caution Jones against filing additional successive and improper pleadings.1 Further abuse of the…

3Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Araujo v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
  2. Jones v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003

4Cited by4 opinions

  1. BELAFONTE LOPEZ ROSIER v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
  2. GARY MC CLOUD v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019
  3. MARVIN C. GILL v. STATE OF FLORIDADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2018
  4. Parker v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016

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

Powered by the Exa API