From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Clark v. State

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
Jan 20, 2016
183 So. 3d 467 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

Opinion

No. 4D15–2388.

01-20-2016

Matthew J. CLARK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Matthew J. Clark, Miami, pro se. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mark J. Hamel, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


Matthew J. Clark, Miami, pro se.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Mark J. Hamel, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals an order denying a rule 3.801 motion to correct jail credit and seeks review of an order denying his motion for extension of time to move for rehearing. Although the defendant stated good cause for an extension of time, we affirm because he was not entitled to relief under rule 3.801 as a matter of law. Our affirmance is without prejudice for him to file a timely rule 3.850 motion if he can state a sufficient claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Affirmed.

STEVENSON, GROSS and MAY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Clark v. State

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT
Jan 20, 2016
183 So. 3d 467 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)
Case details for

Clark v. State

Case Details

Full title:MATTHEW J. CLARK, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

Court:DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT

Date published: Jan 20, 2016

Citations

183 So. 3d 467 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)