From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lemay v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Mar 3, 2006
921 So. 2d 853 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

Opinion

No. 2D05-4388.

March 3, 2006.

Appeal pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk County; Dick Prince, Judge.


Jason C. Lemay challenges the postconviction court's order summarily denying as untimely his motion for postconviction DNA testing filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853. Although we conclude Lemay's motion was timely filed, we affirm the postconviction court's order because Lemay's motion is facially insufficient. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.853(b)(1). This affirmance is without prejudice to Lemay's right to file a timely, facially sufficient rule 3.853 motion. Any such motion should not be considered successive.

See In re: Amendments to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853(d) , No. SC05-1702 (Fla. Sept. 29, 2005) (extending the deadline for filing a motion for postconviction DNA testing in rule 3.853(d)(1)(A) from October 1, 2005, to July 1, 2006).

Affirmed.

WHATLEY and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.


Summaries of

Lemay v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Mar 3, 2006
921 So. 2d 853 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)
Case details for

Lemay v. State

Case Details

Full title:Jason C. LEMAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Mar 3, 2006

Citations

921 So. 2d 853 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

Citing Cases

Rosa v. State

The State acknowledges that typically our affirmance of a denial like this would be without prejudice to the…

Bing v. State

Any such motion should not be considered successive. See Harvey v. State, 925 So.2d 1111, 1111 (Fla. 2d DCA…