Case Name: Mark ELLIOTT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2011-01-21
Citations: 51 So. 3d 1255
Docket Number: No. 5D10-3195
Parties: Mark ELLIOTT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: GRIFFIN, PALMER, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Third Series
Volume: 51
Pages: 1255–1256

Head Matter:
Mark ELLIOTT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 5D10-3195.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
Jan. 21, 2011.
Mark Elliott, Bristol, pro se.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Anthony J. Golden, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Ap-pellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Mark Elliott timely appeals an order summarily denying his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief and a second order denying his motion for rehearing. We reverse because the original denial order was entered by a judge who had previously entered an order recusing himself from Elliott's case. See, e.g., Collado v. Collado, 858 So.2d 1255 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Although a successor judge denied the mo tion for rehearing, he did so on grounds that the motion improperly reargued matters considered and rejected in the original denial order. Instead, the successor judge should have set aside the original denial order and considered Elliott's post-convietion motion anew. Id. Accordingly, we reverse both orders and remand with instructions that the successor judge give Elliott a new hearing on his 3.850 motion. We have not considered the merits of Elliott's motion, and our remand does not preclude another summary denial of Elliott's motion, if the successor judge independently determines that summary denial is legally warranted.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
GRIFFIN, PALMER, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.