Groo v. State
Groo v. State
685 So. 2d 1033; 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 112; 1997 WL 7169
(Southern Reporter, Second Series)
Groo v. State
Opinion of the Court
Adam Groo appeals the summary denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence pursuant to Florida Rule of Ci'iminal Procedure 3.800(a). We dismiss the appeal because it was not timely filed and therefore, we lack jurisdiction. After the denial of his rule 3.800 motion, Mr. Groo did not file an appeal within thirty (30) days but instead filed a motion for rehearing. The filing of the motion for rehearing did not toll the time for filing his appeal. See Kosek v. State, 640 So.2d 1127 (Fla. 5th DCA), cause dismissed, 648 So.2d 723 (Fla. 1994).
DISMISSED.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.