In Alexander v. Sec. Dep’t of Corrections, No. 06-12501 (March 3, 2008), vacating its prior opinion, the Court held that a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(c) does not toll the AEDPA limitations period. Accordingly, the Court dismissed the Florida inmate’s § 2254 petition as untimely.
The Court noted that, unlike Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850 motions, or even 3.800(a) motions, which challenge the legality of a judgment, a 3.800(c) motion merely invoked the leniency of the court and set forth no challenge of legal error. Consequently, this was not the type of State post-conviction application which tolled the AEDPA limitations period.
Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals - Published Opinions
- Jeffery Milner v. Baptist Health Montgomery, et al - 3/31/2025 -
- USA v. Kh'Lajuwon Murat - 3/28/2025 -
- Grange Insurance Company v. Mark Martin, et al - 3/26/2025 -
- United States Sugar Corporation, et al v. United States Army Corps of Engineers, et al - 3/25/2025 -
- Reginald Bertram Johnson v. Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al - 3/25/2025 -