Hardy v. State , 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17677 ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •                NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
    MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
    IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
    OF FLORIDA
    SECOND DISTRICT
    ARTHUR HARDY,                      )
    )
    Appellant,              )
    )
    v.                                 )                     Case No. 2D15-5625
    )
    STATE OF FLORIDA,                  )
    )
    Appellee.               )
    ___________________________________)
    Opinion filed November 30, 2016.
    Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.
    9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for
    Polk County; Glenn T. Shelby, Judge.
    Arthur Hardy, pro se.
    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 amend is
    not a final order for purposes of appeal." (citing Christner v. State, 
    984 So. 2d 561
    , 562
    (Fla. 2d DCA 2008))).
    Mr. Hardy failed to timely amend his third claim. Instead, after more than
    sixty days transpired, he filed a "motion for rehearing/motion for leave to amend 3.850
    motion" attacking the nonfinal order. Following the postconviction court's denial of his
    motion for rehearing/motion to amend, this appeal ensued.
    Because the postconviction court has not yet entered a final, appealable
    order disposing of each of Mr. Hardy's claims, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the
    court's nonfinal order. See Herron v. State, 
    34 So. 3d 206
    , 206 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)
    (explaining that appellate courts do not have jurisdiction to review nonfinal rule 3.850
    orders). On remand, the court may enter a final order denying Mr. Hardy's third claim
    for failure to timely amend, see Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(3), and disposing of the
    remaining six claims on the merits.
    Dismissed and remanded.
    WALLACE and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
    - 2 -
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2D15-5625

Citation Numbers: 207 So. 3d 342, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 17677

Judges: Silberman, Wallace, Morris

Filed Date: 11/30/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/19/2024