From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mullinax v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
May 9, 2006
931 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 2006)

Opinion

Case No. SC05-883.

May 9, 2006.

Lower Tribunal No. 2D04-4644.

Lower Tribunal No. 2D04-4644.


As petitioner has failed to demonstrate a clear legal right to the reinstatement of the appeal in Mullinax v. State, case number 2D04-4644, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied.See Huffman v. State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000) (holding that in order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, the petitioner must show that he has a clear legal right to performance of the requested act, that the respondent has an indisputable legal duty to perform that act, and that no other adequate remedy exists). To the extent petitioner raises claims other than a reinstatement of his appeal, the petition is denied without prejudice.

WELLS, ANSTEAD, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANTERO and BELL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Mullinax v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
May 9, 2006
931 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 2006)
Case details for

Mullinax v. State

Case Details

Full title:CHRISTOPHER MULLINAX, Petitioner(s) v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent(s)

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: May 9, 2006

Citations

931 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 2006)