From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lynch v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jan 27, 1982
409 So. 2d 133 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

No. 81-1332.

January 27, 1982.

Joseph W. DuRocher, Public Defender, and Thomas E. Doss, II, Asst. Public Defender, Orlando, for petitioner.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and James Dickson Crock, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for respondent.


Petitioner appealed to the Circuit Court from a judgment of conviction entered by the County Court. On May 11, 1981, the Public Defender's office, on behalf of petitioner, filed in the Circuit Court a motion to extend the time for filing his initial brief because of delay in the preparation of the record on appeal, asserting that the State Attorney had no objection to the granting of the extension.

In his petition for writ of certiorari, petitioner repeats that assertion and in its response the State does not challenge its accuracy.

Although no order was entered on the motion for extension of time, on July 29, 1981, the circuit judge wrote a letter to the Public Defender's office advising that the appeal would be dismissed unless a brief was filed on or before August 12, 1981. A copy of the letter was filed in the court file. On August 5, 1981, the State served a motion to dismiss the appeal because the time for filing briefs had expired and appellant's brief had not been filed. On the same day, without notice or a hearing, the court entered an order dismissing the appeal. A timely motion to reinstate the appeal was denied, despite a showing that appellant's brief was filed on August 7, 1981, and petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari.

Petitioner alleges that the failure to reinstate the appeal in the light of the facts here constitutes a departure from the essential requirements of law, such as to cause petitioner irreparable injury which cannot be remedied by appeal. It seems contrary to fundamental fairness, and thus a violation of petitioner's right to due process of law, to advise him that he had until August 12, 1981 to file his brief, and then dismiss the appeal on August 5th. In the light of the foregoing, and considering also the fact that petitioner's brief was filed on August 7th, well within the time frame set by the court, there was a departure from the essential requirements of law which results in irreparable injury in the denial of petitioner's motion to reinstate his appeal. See State v. Wagner, 403 So.2d 1349 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).

The petition for certiorari is GRANTED, and the order denying petitioner's motion to reinstate the appeal is QUASHED.

DAUKSCH, C.J., and COBB, J., concur.


Summaries of

Lynch v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Jan 27, 1982
409 So. 2d 133 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

Lynch v. State

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD J. LYNCH, PETITIONER, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Jan 27, 1982

Citations

409 So. 2d 133 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Citing Cases

State Farm Florida Ins. v. Bonham

The mere possibility of different juries arriving at a different conclusion on a fact common to two lawsuits…

Commercial Carriers Corp. v. Kelley

The mere fact that separate actions arise out of the same motor vehicle accident does not mandate a…