From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bray v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Dec 15, 1997
702 So. 2d 302 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

Summary

noting that although the record showed that the appellant's rule 3.850 motion was received by the clerk's office in March 1997, the record also contained two documents attesting to an earlier timely filing of the motion, "i.e., that Bray submitted the original 3.850 motion to prison officials for mailing on December 27, 1997," explaining that if the appellant's assertion was correct, his postconviction motion was timely filed in accordance with the mailbox rule, and holding that because there was a factual issue presented, reversal and remand for an evidentiary hearing was necessary

Summary of this case from Snodgrass v. State

Opinion

Case No. 97-2315

Opinion filed December 15, 1997.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Columbia County. E. Vernon Douglas, Judge.

Appellant, pro se.

Trisha E. Meggs, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Charles W. Bray, III appeals an order dismissing his 3.850 motion as untimely. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Although the record shows that Bray's motion was received by the clerk of court on March 18, 1997, the record also contains two documents attesting to an earlier timely filing of the motion, i.e., that Bray submitted the original 3.850 motion to prison officials for mailing on December 27, 1994. If Bray's assertion is correct, his postconviction motion was timely filed in accordance with the mailbox rule articulated in Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614 (Fla. 1992). The State concedes, correctly so, that an evidentiary hearing is necessary if this court finds that Bray's allegation of timely submission is sufficient.

Because there is a factual issue presented, we reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Bray timely filed the motion.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and DAVIS, JJ., CONCUR.


Summaries of

Bray v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Dec 15, 1997
702 So. 2d 302 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

noting that although the record showed that the appellant's rule 3.850 motion was received by the clerk's office in March 1997, the record also contained two documents attesting to an earlier timely filing of the motion, "i.e., that Bray submitted the original 3.850 motion to prison officials for mailing on December 27, 1997," explaining that if the appellant's assertion was correct, his postconviction motion was timely filed in accordance with the mailbox rule, and holding that because there was a factual issue presented, reversal and remand for an evidentiary hearing was necessary

Summary of this case from Snodgrass v. State

In Bray v. State, 702 So.2d 302 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), we reversed with directions to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the motion was timely filed in accordance with the mailbox rule articulated in Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614 (Fla. 1992) (holding that a 3.850 motion which is turned over to prison authorities for mailing within the two-year limitation period is timely even though it is not stamped by the court clerk until after the time limit has expired).

Summary of this case from Griffin v. State

In Bray v. State, 702 So.2d 302 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997), we reversed with directions to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the motion was timely filed in accordance with the mailbox rule articulated in Haag v. State, 591 So.2d 614 (Fla. 1992) (holding that a 3.850 motion which is turned over to prison authorities for mailing within the two-year limitation period is timely even though it is not stamped by the court clerk until after the time limit has expired).

Summary of this case from Bray v. State
Case details for

Bray v. State

Case Details

Full title:CHARLES W. BRAY, III, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Dec 15, 1997

Citations

702 So. 2d 302 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

Citing Cases

Valencia v. State

Id. at 617 n. 3. In Doty v. State, 792 So.2d 1248, 1249 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001), Jones v. State, 785 So.2d 561,…

Snodgrass v. State

he appellant's second addendum "bears a prison stamp indicating that it was handed over for mailing on…