PARAMORE v. STATE, 70 So.3d 615 (2011)
Court: Court of Appeals of Florida
Number: inflco20110504247
Visitors: 14
Filed: May 04, 2011
Latest Update: May 04, 2011
Summary: PER CURIAM. We are satisfied in light of the recent order directing the state to respond to the petitioner's motion for postconviction relief that the circuit court is taking appropriate measures to dispose of that motion. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Munn v. Florida Parole Commn., 807 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Nonetheless, as we did in Munn, we encourage the circuit court to expeditiously rule on the motion pending before it. DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK, an
Summary: PER CURIAM. We are satisfied in light of the recent order directing the state to respond to the petitioner's motion for postconviction relief that the circuit court is taking appropriate measures to dispose of that motion. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Munn v. Florida Parole Commn., 807 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Nonetheless, as we did in Munn, we encourage the circuit court to expeditiously rule on the motion pending before it. DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK, and..
More
PER CURIAM.
We are satisfied in light of the recent order directing the state to respond to the petitioner's motion for postconviction relief that the circuit court is taking appropriate measures to dispose of that motion. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Munn v. Florida Parole Commn., 807 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Nonetheless, as we did in Munn, we encourage the circuit court to expeditiously rule on the motion pending before it.
DAVIS, VAN NORTWICK, and CLARK, JJ., concur.
Source: Leagle
