McBride v. State, 83-2241
| Citation | 443 So.2d 416 |
| Decision Date | 04 January 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 83-2241,83-2241 |
| Parties | Alphonso McBRIDE, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Alphonso McBride, Raiford, pro se petitioner.
No appearance required for respondent.
The matter is before us upon Petition For Writ of Mandamus and Responses of the State of Florida which agree that Petitioner is entitled to relief.
It appears that Petitioner duly filed his Motion For Post-Conviction Relief, pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, in the Circuit Court of the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Indian River County, Florida, sometime in March, 1983. It appears that the Honorable G. Kendall Sharp, Circuit Judge, endorsed the original motion in his handwriting "motion denied 3/14/83." However, no formal order has been filed or rendered. We issued an order to show cause on October 31, 1983, and, to date, a proper order has not been entered. The failure to promptly issue a formal order results in an inappropriate delay as concerns Petitioner's appellate rights.
We grant the petition for Writ of Mandamus. Flagship Nat. Bank of Miami v. Testa, 429 So.2d 69 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); State ex rel. Locke v. Sandler, 156 Fla. 136, 23 So.2d 276 (1945); State ex rel. Palmer v. Atkinson, 116 Fla. 366, 156 So. 726 (1934).
We respectfully direct the Honorable G. Kendall Sharp, Circuit Judge, or his successor, to enter a formal ruling upon Petitioner's Motion For Post-Conviction Relief, in accordance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, within ten (10) days of receipt of this order, or from date issued. We are content that Respondent will comply with the directions of this Court without the necessity for the issuance of the peremptory writ.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Davis v. Twentieth Judicial Circuit Court, Lee County, 86-1699
...relief or unreasonably delays the resolution of such a motion. See, e.g., Francois v. Klein, 431 So.2d 165 (Fla.1983); McBride v. State, 443 So.2d 416 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). However, we decline to grant Davis' petition because at the time the motion in question was filed Davis was in the proc......
-
Mason v. Circuit Court, Fifth Judicial Circuit
...1065 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Davis v. Twentieth Judicial Circuit Court, Lee County, 491 So.2d 1232 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); McBride v. State, 443 So.2d 416 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). Here, the court has not ruled apparently because of the Department's failure to respond to the Circuit Court's order to sh......
-
Deboles v. State, 5D07-38.
...to the courts. See Lewis, 934 So.2d at 605-06. Accordingly, we feel compelled to issue the writ of mandamus. See McBride v. State, 443 So.2d 416 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). We, therefore, direct the Honorable Daniel P. Dawson, or his successor to rule on the rule 3.850 motion filed by Mr. Deboles ......
-
Moore v. Kaplan, 94-0191
...delay concerning petitioner's appellate rights, we are compelled to grant the petition for writ of mandamus. McBride v. State, 443 So.2d 416 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984); Benczo v. Korda 528 So.2d 555 (Fla. 4th DCA Therefore, we direct the Honorable Stanton S. Kaplan or his successor, to enter a for......