From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sparklin v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Nov 15, 2013
CASE NO.: SC12-1139 (Fla. Nov. 15, 2013)

Opinion

CASE NO.: SC12-1139 Lower Tribunal No.: 2D12-1264 Lower Tribunal No.: 11-003184-CI

11-15-2013

RANDY LEE SPARKLIN Petitioner(s) v. STATE OF FLORIDA Respondent(s)


Petitioner has submitted a "Pro se: Notice-motion to invoke abuse of judicial discretionary jurisdiction review to be conducted de novo pursuant to: FRACP 9.120 and filing of true bill of affirmation claim suit affidavit," which this Court has treated as a petition for writ of mandamus. The petition is hereby dismissed without prejudice.

Petitioner has filed motions for extension of time on February 7, 2013; March 4, 2013; May 6, 2013; October 21, 2013; and October 29, 2013. To the extent Petitioner's motions seek an extension of time to file a proper petition, the motions are hereby denied as moot. To the extent Petitioner's motions seek other relief, the motions are hereby treated as a petition for writ of habeas corpus and transferred, pursuant to Harvard v. Singletary, 733 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 1999), to the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit in and for Santa Rosa County, Florida.

The transfer of this case should not be construed as an adjudication or comment on the merits of the petition, nor as a determination that the transferee court has jurisdiction or that the petition has been properly denominated as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The transferee court should not interpret the transfer of this case as an indication that it must or should reach the merits of the petition. The transferee court shall treat the petition as if it had been originally filed there on the date it was filed in this Court and is instructed to consider expediting the petition as it appears to be time sensitive based upon the allegations; however, a determination to expedite consideration is at the discretion of the transferee court. Any determination concerning whether a filing fee shall be applicable to this case shall be made by the transferee court. Any and all pending motions in this case are hereby deferred to the transferee court.

Any future pleadings filed regarding this case should be filed in the above mentioned circuit court at 6865 Caroline Street, Milton, FL 32570. LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur. A True Copy
Test:
____________
John A. Tomasmo
Clerk. Supreme Court
kb
Served:
CHRISTINA ZUCCARO
RANDY LEE SPARKLIN
HON. KEN BURKE, CLERK
HON. DONALD C. SPENCER, CLERK
HON. JAMES BIRKHOLD, CLERK
HON. BERNARD JOSEPH MCCABE, JR.


Summaries of

Sparklin v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Nov 15, 2013
CASE NO.: SC12-1139 (Fla. Nov. 15, 2013)
Case details for

Sparklin v. State

Case Details

Full title:RANDY LEE SPARKLIN Petitioner(s) v. STATE OF FLORIDA Respondent(s)

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Nov 15, 2013

Citations

CASE NO.: SC12-1139 (Fla. Nov. 15, 2013)