Home Justices Public Information
Doc. Date Docketed Description Filed by Notes
01/20/2004 NOTICE-DISCRETIONARY JURIS (DIRECT CONFLICT) PS Richard Walker BY: PS Richard Walker FILED AS AN APPEAL OF THE FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS ORDER DENYING APPELLANT ACCESS TO RELEVANT LEGAL MATERIALS AND TREATED AS A NOTICE TO INVOKE DISCRETIONARY JURISDICTION
03/09/2004 No Fee Required 9.141 SUMMARY APPEAL BELOW
03/18/2004 LOWER TRIBUNAL DOCUMENTS Hon. Frank J. Habershaw, Clerk D5 BY: D5 Hon. Frank J. Habershaw, Clerk D5
03/23/2004 MOTION-COUNS APPOINTMENT PS Richard Walker BY: PS Richard Walker (O&5)
03/23/2004 MOTION-EXT OF TIME (JURIS BRIEF) PS Richard Walker BY: PS Richard Walker (O&5) (GRANTED TO & INCLUDING 04/13/04-SEE ORDER DATED 03/24/04)
03/24/2004 ORDER-COUNS APPOINTMENT DY Petitioner's motion for appointment of counsel is hereby denied. If the Court accepts jurisdiction the motion will be reconsidered at that time. Petitioner's motion for extension of time is granted and petitioner is allowed to and including April 13, 2004, in which to serve a brief on jurisdiction.
04/12/2004 JURIS INITIAL BRIEF PS Richard Walker BY: PS Richard Walker (O&5) FILED AS NOTICE TO INVOKE DISCRETIONARY JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT W/APPENDIX (DOES NOT CONTAIN TABLE OF CONTENTS, TABLE OF CITATIONS, STATMENT OF CASE AND OF THE FACTS, SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT, ARGUMENT OR A CERT. OF COMPLIANCE. THE APPENDIX CONTAINS MORE THAN THE DCA DECISION) (04/15/2004, CERTIFIED COPY FROM 5DCA FILED)
04/19/2004 ORDER-BRIEF/APPENDIX STRICKEN (NON-COMPLIANCE) Petitioner's brief with appendix, which was filed with this Court on April 12, 2004, does not comply with Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.120(d) and 9.210(a)(2)(b)(1)(2)(3)(4)(5) and is hereby stricken. Petitioner is hereby directed, on or before May 10, 2004, to serve an original and five (5) copies of an amended brief with appendix which contains the following in order: a Table of Contents, a Table of Citations, a Statement of the Case and of the Facts, a Summary of Argument, an Argument, a Conclusion and a Certificate of Compliance that immediately follows the Certificate of Service. The Appendix should be separately bound or separated from the brief by a divider and appropriate tab and should contain only a conformed copy of the decision of the district court of appeal.
05/10/2004 JURIS INITIAL AMD BRIEF PS Richard Walker BY: PS Richard Walker (O&5) FILED AS NOTICE TO INVOKE DISCRETIONARY JURISDICTION OF THE SUPREME COURT
05/10/2004 APPENDIX (AMENDED) PS Richard Walker BY: PS Richard Walker (O&5) (CONTAINS MORE THAN DCA DECISION)
05/12/2004 ORDER-APPENDIX STRIKE PORTIONS (JURIS) The appendix to petitioner's amended brief on jurisdiction, which was filed with this Court on May 10, 2004, does not comply with Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.120(d). All documents contained in petitioner's appendix, with the exclusion of the district court's decision, are hereby stricken.
06/21/2004 MOTION-EXT OF TIME (JURIS BRIEF) RS State Of Florida state1 BY: RS Angela D. Mccravy 0983391
06/21/2004 MOTION-TOLL TIME RS State Of Florida state1 BY: RS Angela D. Mccravy 0983391
06/23/2004 RESPONSE PS Richard Walker BY: PS Richard Walker TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AND MOTION TO TOLL
06/25/2004 ORDER-EXT OF TIME GR (JURIS BRIEF-RESPONDENT)
07/09/2004 JURIS ANSWER BRIEF RS State Of Florida state1 BY: RS Angela D. Mccravy 0983391 (O&5) W/DISKETTE & APPENDIX (DISKETTE IS BLANK) (REQUESTED NEW DISKETTE) (DISKETTE FILED 7/16/04)
07/21/2004 JURIS REPLY BRIEF (NOT ALLOWED) PS Richard Walker BY: PS Richard Walker (O&5)
07/28/2004 ORDER-BRIEF STRICKEN AS UNAUTHORIZED Petitioner's reply brief on jurisdiction is hereby stricken as unauthorized as there are no provisions in the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure for the filing of a reply brief on jurisdiction.
03/17/2005 JURISDICTION ACCEPTED
03/17/2005 DISP-DISMISSED-LACK OF JURISDT Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the district court orders in the present cases fail to meet the Florida Star II standard set forth above, and we lack subject-matter jurisdiction over these cases. Accordingly, we dismiss the petitions for review. No motion for rehearing or clarification will be entertained in these cases or in any other case that we may dismiss in the future based on the reasoning set forth herein. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.330(d).
06/15/2005 ARCHIVES