|
Doc.
|
Date Docketed
|
Description
|
Filed by
|
Notes
|
|
10/15/2018
|
PETITION-HABEAS CORPUS
|
PT Arthur James Martin 436687 BY: PT Dawn B. Macready 542611
|
Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
|
|
10/15/2018
|
NOTICE-CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION
|
PT Arthur James Martin 436687 BY: PT Dawn B. Macready 542611
|
Notice of Confidential Information within Court Filing
|
|
10/17/2018
|
No Fee Required
|
|
3.851 Proceeding
|
|
|
10/17/2018
|
ACKNOWLEDGMENT LETTER-NEW CASE
|
Supreme Court Of Florida BY: Supreme Court Of Florida
|
|
|
|
10/17/2018
|
ORDER-RESPONSE/REPLY REQUESTED
|
|
Petitioner has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. Respondent is hereby requested to file a response to the above-referenced petition on or before December 26, 2018. Petitioner shall have forty days after filing of the response in which to file the reply to response.
|
|
|
12/21/2018
|
RESPONSE
|
Julie L. Jones, Etc. BY: RS Lisa Hopkins 99459
|
Response to Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus
|
|
|
01/30/2019
|
REPLY TO RESPONSE
|
PT Arthur James Martin 436687 BY: PT Dawn B. Macready 542611
|
Reply Brief of Petitioner
|
|
|
01/30/2019
|
ORDER-CASE STYLE CHANGE
|
|
The style of the above case has been changed from Arthur James Martin vs. Julie L. Jones, etc. to Arthur James Martin vs. Mark S. Inch, etc.
|
|
|
02/14/2019
|
ORDER-OA SCHED
|
|
The above cases are hereby scheduled for oral argument at 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, May 8, 2019. A maximum of twenty minutes to the side is allowed for the argument, but counsel is expected to use only so much of that time as is necessary.
NO CONTINUANCES WILL BE GRANTED EXCEPT UPON A SHOWING OF EXTREME HARDSHIP.
|
|
05/08/2019
|
ORAL ARGUMENT HELD
|
|
|
|
|
01/16/2020
|
DISP-DENIED
|
|
FSC-OPINION: Based upon the foregoing, we affirm the order of the postconviction court and deny the petition for writ of habeas corpus. It is so ordered.
|
|
|
01/31/2020
|
MOTION-REHEARING
|
PT Arthur James Martin 436687 BY: PT Dawn B. Macready 542611
|
Appellant's Motion for Rehearing
|
|
|
02/26/2020
|
DISP-REHEARING DY
|
|
Appellant/Petitioner's Motion for Rehearing is hereby denied.
|
|
|
03/05/2020
|
MOTION-REHEARING
|
RS Mark S. Inch, Etc. BY: RS Lisa Hopkins 99459
|
Appellee's Motion for Rehearing/Clarification or for Remand for Reconsideration in Light of State v. Poole
|
|
|
03/09/2020
|
MOTION-STRIKE
|
PT Arthur James Martin 436687 BY: PT Dawn B. Macready 542611
|
Appellant's Motion to Strike Appellee's Motion for Rehearing/Clarification or for Remand for Reconsideration in Light of State v. Poole
|
|
|
04/01/2020
|
ORDER-STAY PROCEEDINGS FSC (TAG CASE)
|
|
The proceedings in the circuit court and in this Court in the above cases are stayed pending disposition of State of Florida v. Michael James Jackson, Case No. SC20-257 and State of Florida v. Bessman Okafor, Case No. SC20-323, which are pending in this Court.
|
|
|
04/27/2020
|
NOTICE-APPEARANCE
|
RS Mark S. Inch, Etc. BY: RS William D. Chappell 120449
|
|
|
|
08/03/2020
|
USSC Not/Cert Filed in FSC
|
|
The petition for a writ of certiorari in the above entitled case was filed on July 27, 2020 and placed on the docket July 30, 2020 as No. 20-5221.
|
|
|
08/27/2020
|
NOTICE-APPEARANCE
|
RS Mark S. Inch, Etc. BY: RS Jason W. Rodriguez 125285
|
Notice of Appearance & Substitution of Counsel
|
|
|
10/09/2020
|
USSC Disp-Certiorari Dy
|
|
The Court today entered the following order in the above-entitled case:
The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied.
|
|
|
03/09/2021
|
DISP-REHEARING DY
|
|
Appellee/Respondent's Motion for Rehearing/Clarification is hereby denied.
|
|
|
03/09/2021
|
ORDER-STRIKE DY
|
|
Appellant/Petitioner's "Motion to Strike Appellee's Motion for Rehearing/Clarification or for Remand for Reconsideration in Light of State v. Poole" is hereby denied as moot.
|
|
|
03/31/2021
|
ORDER-NOTICE OF DELAY
|
|
Article I, section 16(b)(10)b. of the Florida Constitution provides that all state-level appeals and collateral attacks on any judgment must be complete within two years of the date of appeal in non-capital cases and five years from the date of appeal in capital cases unless a court enters an order with specific findings as to why the court was unable to comply and the circumstances causing the delay. Pursuant to the administrative procedures and definitions set forth in Supreme Court of Florida Administrative Order No. AOSC19-76, this case was not completed within the time frame required by Article I, section 16(b)(10)b. because the time frame had already expired by the time this case was filed.
|
