Summary
holding that an order disposing of some, but not all, of the issues raised in a rule 3.850 motion is not appealable
Summary of this case from Grider v. StateOpinion
No. 84-414.
May 2, 1984.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Pinellas County, William Walker, J.
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This appeal is from an order summarily denying several points in a motion to vacate a judgment and sentence filed under Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. The trial court has not disposed of the remaining point in the Rule 3 motion but an evidentiary hearing has been scheduled thereon.
Thus, the question arises as to the appealability of an order partially disposing of a Rule 3 motion. If this were purely a civil case, such a partial order would not be appealable unless it disposed of claims unrelated to the remaining claims. An order or judgment is not considered final until it disposes of all the issues presented. The same policies against allowing piecemeal appeals apply here. We see no reason not to apply this principle to orders entered on Rule 3 motions.
See Mendez v. West Flagler Assoc., Inc., 303 So.2d 1 (Fla. 1974) and SLT Warehouse v. Webb, 304 So.2d 97 (Fla. 1974).
See Haddad, Partial `Final' Judgments — A Persistent Problem in Appellate Practice, 53 Fla.B.J. 204 (1979).
If appellant's remaining point is denied, he may raise all issues on appeal from the final order. This appeal is hereby DISMISSED.
SCHEB, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and LEHAN, JJ., concur.