Case Name: Michael Anthony BENNETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1999-03-10
Citations: 740 So. 2d 4
Docket Number: No. 98-429
Parties: Michael Anthony BENNETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: WOLF, KAHN and LAWRENCE, JJ., CONCUR.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 740
Pages: 4–4

Head Matter:
Michael Anthony BENNETT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 98-429.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
March 10, 1999.
Appellant, pro se.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Michael Anthony Bennett appeals an order which denied a motion brought pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 in which he challenged the imposition of consecutive habitual offender sentences. We reverse.
The trial court denied the motion as untimely, citing State v. Callaway, 658 So.2d 983 (Fla. 1995). Callaway held that claims pursuant to Hale v. State, 630 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1993) must be brought within the two year period following the Hale decision. After the order of the trial court, and while this appeal was pending, the Florida Supreme Court decided Dixon v. State, 24 Fla. L. Weekly S67, 730 So.2d 265 (Fla. 1999)(holding that criminal defendants have two years from the issuance of the mandate in Callaway to file a Hale post-conviction claim). Under Dixon, the cut-off point for filing Hale claims is August 16, 1997. Because appellant's motion was filed on June 10, 1996, it is timely under Dixon. Therefore, we reverse and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
WOLF, KAHN and LAWRENCE, JJ., CONCUR.