No. 18-7930

Richard S. Button v. Mark S. Inch, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

Lower Court: Eleventh Circuit
Docketed: 2019-02-12
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
Response WaivedIFP
Tags: filing-date habeas-corpus legal-interpretation motion-amendment postconviction-relief procedural-rules relation-back standard-of-review state-law timeliness
Key Terms:
HabeasCorpus Securities
Latest Conference: 2019-03-15
Question Presented (AI Summary)

Do the procedural rules in effect at time of filing govern whether an application for state postconviction relief is properly filed?

Question Presented (from Petition)

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED 1) DO THE PROCEDURAL RULES IN EFFECT AT TIME OF FILING, GOVERN WHETHER AN APPLICATION FOR STATE POSTCONVICTION RELIEF IS PROPERLY FILED? 2) WHAT IS THE STANDARD FOR THE CORRECT INTERPRETATION . OF A PROPERLY FILED MOTION? 3) DOES AN AMENDED POSTCONVICTION MOTION THAT CORRECTS A DEFICIENCY RELATE BACK TO THE ORIGINAL FILING DATE? . / ii

Docket Entries

2019-03-18
Petition DENIED.
2019-02-28
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 3/15/2019.
2019-02-13
Waiver of right of respondent Inch, Sec., FL DOC, et al. to respond filed.
2018-04-25
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due March 14, 2019)

Attorneys

Inch, Sec., FL DOC, et al.
Celia A. Terenzio — Respondent
Celia A. Terenzio — Respondent
Richard S. Button
Richard Button — Petitioner
Richard Button — Petitioner