Lavers v. State
Lavers v. State
Opinion of the Court
In this Anders
However, “[o]rders denying relief under rule 3.800(c) are not renewable by appeal.” Seward v. State, 912 So.2d 389, 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005). Such an order is reviewable by way of certiorari if the trial court erroneously determines that the motion was untimely. See id. Here, the trial court denied Lavers’ motion on the merits. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal insofar as Lavers seeks review of the order denying his rule 3.800(c) motion. See Adams v. State, 800 So.2d 741, 741 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).
Affirmed in part, dismissed in part.
. Anders v, California, 386 U.S. 738, 741, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.