Green v. State
The Third District reversed a summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion that the trial court had deemed untimely, agreeing with the State's concession that a tolling belated appeal made the motion timely. The court also rejected the State's alternative affirmance argument and held that on remand the trial court must consider Green's pending motion to amend his postconviction motion, which was filed within the limitations period and before any ruling on the merits.
Key facts
- Green filed a Rule 3.850 postconviction motion that the trial court summarily denied as untimely, but Green had filed a belated direct appeal during the two-year limitations period.
- The Third District reversed, agreeing with the State's concession that the limitations period was tolled during the pendency of the belated appeal, rendering the postconviction motion timely.
- +2 more key facts with a free trial
Why it matters
This opinion reinforces the well-established but frequently litigated rule that a motion to amend a postconviction motion filed within the limitations period and before a ruling must generally be permitted, citing… — full analysis with a trial
🔒 Read the full opinion, holding & search the library
The full opinion PDF, the rules the court applied, our significance analysis, the background facts, and full-text search across every tracked Florida decision are available to members. Start a free 30-day trial — no credit card.
Not ready to sign up? Get the free Friday digest — the week's key Florida decisions by email, no login required.
Florida Court Tracker provides summaries of publicly available court opinions for informational and research purposes only. This is not legal advice and does not create an attorney–client relationship. Always verify holdings against the official opinion.