Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Tyrone Wells v. State of Florida, 17-4309 (2019)

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida Number: 17-4309 Visitors: 5
Filed: Apr. 22, 2019
Latest Update: Mar. 03, 2020
Summary: FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _ No. 1D17-4309 _ TYRONE WELLS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Mark Borello, Judge. April 22, 2019 PER CURIAM. The Appellant, Tyrone Wells, appeals an order denying five of his six claims for postconviction relief raised pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He asserts on appeal, among other arguments, that the court erred by not addressing the sixth of his claims for r
More
         FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
                STATE OF FLORIDA
                 _____________________________

                         No. 1D17-4309
                 _____________________________

TYRONE WELLS,

    Appellant,

    v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

    Appellee.
                 _____________________________


On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
Mark Borello, Judge.

                         April 22, 2019


PER CURIAM.

     The Appellant, Tyrone Wells, appeals an order denying five
of his six claims for postconviction relief raised pursuant to
Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He asserts on appeal,
among other arguments, that the court erred by not addressing
the sixth of his claims for relief, which alleged that defense
counsel was ineffective for failing to properly advise him with
respect to plea negotiations. The appellant advised the trial
court that it failed to rule on this claim in his motion for
rehearing, but the trial court denied the motion without
comment.

    We agree with the Appellant that the circuit court's order did
not address the sixth claim that was labeled “Ground Six” in his
motion. “Rather than forming a basis to reverse the order,
however, the lack of a ruling on this claim deprives this court of
jurisdiction.” Bachman v. State, 
253 So. 3d 1250
(Fla. 1st DCA
2018); Hanner v. State, 
228 So. 3d 1161
(Fla. 1st DCA 2017)
(dismissing where “[o]n appeal, Appellant argues that
the postconviction court erred by failing to address all of the
claims in his motion”). “It is well-settled that an order disposing
of some, but not all of the claims in a motion
for postconviction relief is not an appealable final order.” Lake v.
State, 
53 So. 3d 1125
, 1126 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). Accordingly, we
dismiss this appeal without prejudice to the appellant’s ability to
file a future appeal after the circuit court has ruled on all of his
claims.

    DISMISSED.

LEWIS, WINSOR, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

                 _____________________________

    Not final until disposition of any timely and
    authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
    9.331.
               _____________________________


Tyrone Wells, pro se, Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Anne C. Conley, Assistant
Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.




                                   2

Source:  CourtListener

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer