Court Opinion

ID: 9351998
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-04 16:03:22.428826+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:57:40.261096
License: Public Domain

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                             FOURTH DISTRICT

                          STATE OF FLORIDA,
                              Appellant,

                                     v.

                           OSCAR ACEVEDO,
                               Appellee.

                              No. 4D21-3218

                            [January 4, 2023]

   Appeal of a non-final order from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth
Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Andrew L. Siegel, Judge; L.T. Case No.
18-007309CF10A.

   Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Luke R. Napodano,
Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

   Jeremy J. Kroll of Dutko & Kroll, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

    ON MOTION FOR REHEARING OF ORDER DISMISSING CASE

KUNTZ, J.

    On October 11, 2022, we sua sponte dismissed the State’s appeal “for
lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed.” The
dismissal order cited Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c)(2), and
quoted Goodwin v. State, 826 So. 2d 1022, 1023 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)
(“While it is true that the court has the power to reconsider an
interlocutory ruling on a motion to suppress, this does not mean that the
filing of such a motion tolls the time for filing an appeal.”).

   The State moves for rehearing based on Florida Rule of Criminal
Procedure 3.192. Rule 3.192 states, in pertinent part:

      When an appeal by the state is authorized by Florida Rule of
      Appellate Procedure 9.140, or sections 924.07 or 924.071,
      Florida Statutes, the state may file a motion for rehearing
      within 10 days of an order subject to appellate review. A
      motion for rehearing shall state with particularity the points
      of law or fact that, in the opinion of the state, the court has
      overlooked or misapprehended in its decision, and shall not
      present issues not previously raised in the proceeding . . . A
      timely filed motion for rehearing shall toll rendition of the
      order subject to appellate review and the order shall be
      deemed rendered upon the filing of a signed, written order
      denying the motion for rehearing.

Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.192.

   Based on Rule 3.192, our reliance on Goodwin v. State, 826 So. 2d
1022, 1023 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001), was misplaced. Rule 3.192, enacted after
Goodwin was issued, allows the State to move for rehearing and the State’s
motion tolled rendition of the order appealed. As a result, we grant the
State’s motion for rehearing and vacate our dismissal order. This appeal
will be assigned to a merits panel for disposition.

   Order vacated and appeal reinstated.

CONNER and ARTAU, JJ., concur.

                           *         *        *

    Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                                    2