Case Name: Michael Lamar KING, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-05-29
Citations: 673 So. 2d 985
Docket Number: No. 96-170
Parties: Michael Lamar KING, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: ALLEN and MICKLE, JJ., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 673
Pages: 985–985

Head Matter:
Michael Lamar KING, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 96-170.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
May 29, 1996.
Michael Lamar King, Cross City, Pro Se.
Robert A Butterworth, Attorney General, and Sonya Roebuck Horbelt, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
On October 2, 1995, the trial court entered a postconvietion order correcting illegal sentences imposed upon King in 1990. On November 1,1995, King filed a motion for mitigation of sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b). On November 9, 1995, the trial court entered an order dismissing the motion on the grounds that the trial court did not have jurisdiction because more than sixty days had passed since sentence was imposed. The appellant argues, and the appellee agrees, that the trial court had jurisdiction to entertain a 3.800(b) motion for sixty days following the order correcting illegal sentences. See Arnold v. State, 621 So.2d 503 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). In accordance with Arnold and Marsh v. State, 497 So.2d 954 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), we treat this appeal as a petition for certiorari and quash the trial court's November 9, 1995, order. On November 9, 1995, twenty-two days remained within which the trial court might have acted on King's motion. Accordingly, the trial court will have authority to act on King's motion for a period of twenty-two days from the date that this opinion becomes final.
ALLEN and MICKLE, JJ., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur.