SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA

aOct QVY15 .

1NDi&AMT SPhi F COO980Ff

Appetic / Pehho

Supreme Court Case Mo

Appeal Cour t Case Mo 2007 - 324 2

Tribunal Lower Case Mo CRCO316883 CFAMOCRC03)B884 CFAND

DisTR) CT COURT OF APPE A L , SE CDhiD OtSTR\CT ek esL

Appene2 / Responctcøds

APPELLAMT$ AMENDED lhitTiAL BR1EF

GUB-JECT MATTER JURl5DICTiOA1AL 18SUE

e Sfanc(l IAlsiliarnsPolk Cscrechoria\ inshbbo^F " Oe,rm i +oe ß=k F3 E OS L<>~osco Exc Ro«dPolk City Flonact 33868-692$~

TABLE OF C-OM-TEM'T S

Tabt e of ConkenEs

Jurisdicboned Invokef

C,6on oF ¼e Co.se s 11

Sec+e rn en b oP H,e Case_ and Fetc+s 1

Sum rnary of Hu Argurnen f 6

Ground One

TWE APPELLAMT CLMMS T T THE SECOMD D\STBttT COURTLACKED OLtBJECT MATT FPßD(CT(òM AMD ACTED

L O C HT P A DF E U R CT DFA MŸ~rTER iMITHOU'r THE SECòMD ÖlSTPJCT (OL(R'TSULlRIS DitT(oAJ .

Stanetar-ci o f Reme w &

Argumen E B' 13

Conclus<o n 13

C-er h Pt ecde. o P Serv t t e. 15

JuR\s D1 C T toMA L iMvoKE

Thts coctr+ hems pnsamh an to reute pursuub be

Arb cde. \/ se-chon 1 (") cmd 3 (b) (3) of ¼« Florectc

Constituhon and Fior, Raes oE AppdL«be- Proce -

dure_ rw e § 9. 03 0 (a)(2) (A) (vi) Ftøna« Ska¼E e (2o03)

½ere is a con¼ck oF decasions skhm the Diekr

Courts 6ee Nánnah v State , 40E Sø2d 565~ (Fla. A .

5 Otof 1981) and Flor,da Rede. eF Appeitede Precedurrui e. § 9, t I o (d) (a) Elo r<da StatuFe (Zoo 3)

11

CtTATtOM OF THE CASES

Svare case_3

Becker v St«te,695 S czmt 4 4 O (Flee AFF 2nd Dts b 2006 )

Burke ft v Elcdt,4)oD sø2cl 138 (Fict App 5 Otsk [9st)

Ccmakarm v Canakcæ,s3BE Gold 1197 , 1263 CFid 1986)

Oole v Sfc fe,714 Sø2d 479, 486 ra,12 (Fict App 2nd Dtsk 1998)

Hanncsh v Skole ,40Z 6old 655' CFtc Age 5 Di»F 1981)

Woreten y SGcke,9E9 Søld 324 (Fice App 2nd Disk 2002)

ob\e v Sbbe,353 S.2d 819 (Ffct Af>p 1 Ots F 1976) or. remo»d3-74 6oZd ill6 (FlaL977)

Sm+h v Skoke,395 S.2d 675 CFicm Aer 5 D<s F 1981)

'Th e- Gres b o und Cor , v Cctrs w el l18 ) sø2a ro9 e C Fict 1 66 )

Williams v Stede,324 6•Ld -74 (F(ce(975~)

Willhms v Sfcde,4 So3d }Ž36 (Fict AFF 2~d Dts¥ 2008)

Linike.J Shtes Cases

Beeman v Ltnited GFcJres,302 U.S. zu , 212 , 213, 5ß S Ct , L G4 , lbG, 82 LEd 2d104 (t934)

Linited Etcdes v Curry7bo F2d 1019 (cA.)\ (Fict) ISBS)

111

STATEMEWT OF THE CASE AND FACTS

on mesy of 2007 Appencmk was found guMy c,e a FetcJ hy pry

Ehe Frectiµdge cdeer sFcchng on reeccti Ehed he adjudged Hie

Appelteint genity Fcut ed Fo orally pronounce ½e wnFFen judgme

order Fhcd th e De f e ncicin F bcsd be e n adu ts ed in open exur F c

he had H,e r$ht Fo appeal he µdgmeaF by Gang a nahe of

appeod no more then Hurky (.30) cíc9 s aßker probaFLon Ls

or senEence te impesed «no Fhck he hcsci Fae reght be scwe ecunse

°FF°"** °+ ** ®'P©***· c E * Sble for t*n3 sa«l °PP*d

upon the- shcæncj o F insolvemcy C Gee R - T3 i i Fh rouga Pr T 3i+) The

AppcUcink cd Fhcd hme re-c ues bec3 counse,( Fo be_ appombed ßer ½ e

senFe-nctncj pWctee ck Fhe proceectengs , me treoJ co«ek oppmnbed

WhchcteJ O'kkure , ¼cd same cic$ Appe-ttomb wo-s cetted clown to

+he Pinetices counE y Inmo, Mw Lebr«ny and aces msbr«event Ec

Me ce nohce oF exppeed .

On Altog 06, 2007 bhe. AppeUanF cSempFeci ce submdb a repesE

cr cor y seracc.e_ evtcl legcd SuppÍ(es in oMU Fo a nokE cf

appeut cmd mces Fcid Fhc«F he no ioncer woutch retteue cay

more c>dchhoncü copes because he hc×ci lask hts pro'se

sFc Fus , Appe iletnl was folci Fhc-F the enty way he coulci c½F

ccpes tmts Fo ß t e et mcah on Fe citsmess hts ecwF c7pomFect

counseJ cmd he- wootd noF recteve cmy copes unhi ne.'F mon¼

On Mo-y 2:& , 2001 khe A p pe itan F ft i e ci cx Pme t t cm (cun Fy Shen Hs

OHtce DeFenhon cmci Correchon Bure«u Recg«esk For AdminœFr«hve

Remedy , Fec-c¼nS number # CD 07118 sFohng Fhat the Pmelt«s

CounFy Te± Inmcke km b breertc«n Af\r We-nneh (M. Msiter wess

cìirecHy inFerfenng mh Fhe Appcito Es citrecF cppeoj by noF

cMovmncj AppettcmF his p>rc se sbFus to reneue actctthonc« l

cope s onct leSod supplies .

On N1cq 31 , 7100 7 Fhe Pcneitets CounF7 Sheo% CH<cs L i

responde a b Appe tiar, repes i Íce admin nFredme re me

sfahncj| "Mr.NHiloms , accccdinc3 Fe cour+ receras you were

assigned an aworney (lvhew«et o-Hwec) on ytety os, 2007 ,

erekore , you are no longer pro se in regarets b your

Penettees Counby charge s , You mcty ßte mohons kr pur

1 of 1%

appecd by subm+hnS a r%ud f°'m +° *h*

librctry for ¼2 purpose of receiv mcj any forms / moho^s • The

hEty C60) copy per- month rule does etFF t y Fo your currem b

s Fcaces .

On June- 't z, zov i t he AppeUce t wces fon ed h h ie- o-

Me.bon To Dtsmen Courb Appoded ceansed after occiennS wkw to revte . for hts chre-ck egexd .

On Uune. 20 , 2001 Ehe Apechanks SenkencanS was

re_sche,Le ci to Se p Fewt ber 01 , 2o01

On Jane- 7J,, 2001 ¼¿ Appeatod h Lesl « SelceFed htokce of

AppecJ , Skaement of JodecœJ AcAs To Be Rev<ewed ; Direchons

Te The ctesk OF The Courk ; Destcjnechon To The Cour+ ReporFe.r

(see Pr toso breu½ R -toEn)

On July (o, zool the Sec«d Dt*«a Cour+ of Appeod tsseceá cm

Onier SEVERAk'CtMCr the- µdcpe-nF cmet senbence_ oG covicbon

mko bwo se-petroe cme hke£y etts hntck c†pecJs cd ½cs pomb

the. EkiTtP E RECORD Okt APPEAL FoR ccse number 1007 - 3242

EMDS ,

On July 74, 2007 the. Appenemt idea a Mohon Requeeh nej

Lec~e of Ccuck To Amera BneS and an /4menaea Bn ef .

On Awyst to ,2001 the Second Dsh,ci Co-F of Appeoi granted

AppeUcmbs moh o n req ues Gi ng tecvt of the cour+ bo M e an amencied

briek and ctrnended bneS.

On September 07,2007 the AppeJtonh SwFenean$ w

reuc.bedutac\ ¼ December 1% 2007

On Oc+eaber 22 2col he Appedtod bled a Mehon Recrue hn

ht A Pochen of The. Ptecord Be Ptemonded Bcck Te The Lewer

TrauncJ To Se+He The- E s s«e Of The Recrd ,

On Novembez t5, zool tk Secna Dtártek courk of Appeed

ranteet Appet\cmbs Mohon Recge¼ncj ThcJ A Perhon OF The

Recced Be Pien=cteci Bock To The. Lower TethweJ To 6eFHe Issue

Of The Record , ctnd fho cour+ REUM&ULSHED TLLRiSDLCT(

t+1e acœe Fo Fhe tower Fn6unca unht a4er TAuu'ARY (8, 2008

On December 6, zool the Appettards SenFencin$ was

rescheduled to Teinuo.ry 03, 2008 the Appellek wces bre«jhk

up iMo the courfrcom hoichne ceAl area opprom rnc>+e

T.16 PM fror Senbencing and ed H'cd hme- cbd observe

2 e,f 1S

{hrough fhe Viktndow cmd Fhe oyen dDo

Ínkercewmej roern across the hall way mside the cou

conferenc-e roca the Honerubte Junc e R«hard e

cdoncj mFh the Assisha^Ý 8b"k' AN°'4*Y Frasc TheMp ore and the Ddenda^N former °°E of f

þ$ couns ed N\r Nhr.hae i O' Hcure wh o t†pe c re d fa hesn el Ph e

Honorab\e Tudc3e Rtchard A . Luce ½e DekenetnnFs A FFo rney

Cherd Fde the three men then caPPeared to +c he ou

sexeccd pc es emd begem ¿tscuss inc e C

mmc e3 who we_re- a\sc insïde Fhe holding Ce i h Fhe

AppeJte nb , A shod hme 1c&er We APPe-lled wc s ccale.dmto the court room beSore We HonoraAle. TcdSe Rich«rd

A . Letce , ¼¢ tr toJ pcLSe cd ¼cJ hme cœked A pellon Fs

former skand by counsel Mr Mi chc<e l O' Aatre wts Fhere-

cmythmS n me Ddenn¼ Momethe December i4,2cos hearmej ¼<& the Defenacws former

ARe>cney Ucimes \Ál O kied) made cmy nokes d , APPedia^f S

former sband by counsel Mr. Whchc-e \ OHatre ske+ed bhc'F

bhe Dekendemk rncde_ note- cE tb m his mobon lo dismfSS

counse\ but cestcle- from FhcJ there- mcts no emdenc-e of IF

µ&btn khe- Ette , The tric \ ydeje bhen henc°Ï We- Ñc'ke O'"*

iks ctrcµments cmc' re¶ues F E°r C' 5e^l*^c_e_ Fhe wouldcparantee that ¼( DeSendanE weutd che m prison., ½e

coud bhen asked the AFFeUcml whak du:'I he e

be cm appre priate senkenee FheJ bhe courk should imFose-

e AppeDemk requeskea the sarne ¼ue_ yers ¼cd Fhe

couck hod ortcjmcJty oPFered - The Honorc'b(e Tudge

a ee«<ec< m« nepeit«mk to zo yeo,mto the care c+nd cusFody of Fhe DeparFmenF of Correobons

mm 10 years stespencbd mmus liS~ò dcu/s crecM Ecr

hme served fedtowed by LO years of Dreeg OHender

Pre.bcd en .On Janucm/ ·l), zoos ½e Appenemb ß\ed mko Ehe Fmcd

copses o€ c Pmd«s Co«nh 6hen9t Office

DeFenhon cmd correchons Burecm Pecgesk / Comp)cual

form y 6'n -7(øc - "00627 or as rderred to by ebcM and

3 of12

inmckeo twFh(o the Ptnedtas Counh Tcd a"62" form , The

PmettcLe Counk/ Sherdb Depuby wha stSneci Fhe- comp5cun is

unknow, his pctyroll number ctppears k be #5276 the-

ccmplc mb taas e LSreect sucen be. uncle r ½e pencd by eF perpr

p ctré acm E Fo c&p Fe c § 83. i i Dora E,tm M e C 200% c nel

Floreckc' Rules c5 Uudtetcd Actmmisbrahon rate § 2.ik»O Ce)

Flonct c SEcehare cz 0o3) cm eg i ng ew 3

Richcwet A . Leece vi otcde-d ¼© Def enet«rvFs AFForney / d ienF

Con Acienh cd t by R$hb befrore- senkncmc e trecJ jude e

neuer cmswerect ½e. comptcunk .

On 7anu«e7 11, zoo ß ¼2 Appeu=É Atect a Mohon Requeehn

Lectue_oE ¼6 Courk To Fi te_ Arnenched Brxef atone, w¼ Amemled

TruhcJ Bnes .

On Tcmuary 28, 2006 ½e Aggettc.F Gded ¼« Third Amendect

£nihcJ Bn ef ; c ktottce of AppecJ ; pe-s tcfo-hon To The Courb

Reecr+er; D cech on s To The clerk of The Courp , Appetinn r

cjewe fhese docurneds to the mcut room pe_rmy eE Ghe

SEcde- of Flortetes' peporbmed eE correcham , g me htorFh

Ronctee Recephen una mecucc i cenber CRMt) Leske BøHer

Flortetcs , the enue.lopes iMere cjtuen to preson offtecds

unopen for mculi ng .

On March 13, 2008 th e Second Otst-n cF courf oF AypecJ fi t ed

o.n Orde.r GRA MTt AiCr th e to me r Fn b«neJ 3 recg ue e k to esde el ¼6

jurt5chehon 72anc pec danc b FEBRuAR¶ 2Z. Roos =ncl DEMtED

the Appe\lcmt s mohcn requesb ncj leme op c.our+ be f¼te_ cm

ct mended in i bcd bn e f & t eot Tanucwy ( t , zooe : we a. 3

etmencAed inihcJ brief fileß Uonuncy 2R 2008 mcts STRtCKEhl

e APpeeds Courb was refus i nc to ceuo an caggecj ef me

servbenct ncj , If Mcts cd thcd Fime ¼cd cs lat t c.Leck cd

Gwf Coceechanca inshkebten re e Ehe AppeJtembsreu tous l ed in i h cJ bri els et na in Formed Appel lom +

cá ncme of ¼e m referrect to e recoret or conba t ãe d

c( sfcdeme nb of the case. and Ec cAs fbe Appellemb Mcts

eduuseci tho} unless he fdeci "someHvnej" whtch mcoe

reference fc> ¼¢ reccM he tuoutei lose_ hts etppeoJ ,

On (Vwrch 21, 2006 +he AppeUemt Etted c Ntohon 'Tc,

{£¼droM 1m Mcd Brte E cmet Reyes F To Be_ A i to ued To fi t e

4 of L%

Fmcd Inch cd Brtes cdone; wh et sato - bn ek wh t c h vacæie_d Femporan & unh) AFpeJ)c,nt cmJd learn how to ßt le

he correck brteh •

On April OL Zoce the Secona Distrtch G>ork of Agree

ed an Occier GPJ5ktTlAlcr Appeltcuds Mohon RequeshnS °

bctr= AU Precoush Rted AmencLec( ImhcJ Bnef anci

Lecuie OE cc>ur V To ¼t e Ft n cd Ameneted In,cd Bn e ( , khe

courk case GrPJAL1ED c wtFhchwcd of Appe{lcmbs or,cynod

imhcd brted anci GRAALTED the. Attorney Genercds request

for clartßtccdcon , sfahncj the} t½ reord gppears Fc> be

compieke- , t½s wat be. an APPEAL C>F TWE JLipGMENT , hLOT

THE SEkLTENLCE .On April 09 200S the Appetico Fded Amendecl SkdemenE of

Justetet i Acts To Be Piewewed nwng twenty one (21) issues

an Amended Des tSo on To The court Reportex anei Dire-chens

To The. Clerk Of The. Court to consbruck and forward a

compiek e re-co rd . and et Mo h o n Re Sue c h ncj The. Cour F To

Er cree_ Ouh e-s Of The CJerk C¥ The CocxrF . bled in bo th e

Second Distnc+ CourF of Apped .On Apr ! 24 , 2008 Ehe- Secc»sd Otstnck coorF of A ppecd

issuee cm Crder DEA1YlN& Appalcwbs mohon to enforce

duhe-s of bbe clerk cnd court repor+er ,

On Nuy 12,2008 the Appettc F C,\ed mfo Fhe. Seco^d

Diebnch courb c4 Appecd n Mohan Recgeshn3 The CourF To

Grant An Orew Ahov~un$ The Appehnb Bnd To ¾ed The

(GD ) pcu3e Lnvut Rute- , a Mohon For Lecue CF The ConF To

File A suppiernent Bed cma SupplemenF The- Reccrd cmd ct

Mah o n Recge_s hnS we_ GF %c Cour f To Sup p lemn f The

Ptecord an<a a Mobwn Recµ<eshnc3 The CourF To GranF &n

Edens icm of Time. To Fde A FinoJ Bnek Conhun,ng More 'Them

C56) poc3e s

On Meg 2-ï ,2006 the Se a Ptstocl Courf of AFeent nsued

cm Crder DEAlyth(Cr ALL+he Appeí( 5 repe&bs

On M«y '29,2006 Appal Bied ct Nichon Recgeshne For

An Ex¼nsion Of Time To Fite A Rep Bnd Conbconing More

Them OS) Payson June o6,2006 the se=d Dwnd co=F of Apeccd issued

S of LE

ctn Orcier DEhN iMG ALL Appe Ucd rec/Mes b .

On June 2/o , 2008 the ApFe l(cmF A l e d cs Reply ßne b Fh

cerkameci onN (16) page s

On Oc bo ber 03, 200 13 bhe Se cond Des Fn c} Coco4 o f A p pec

is sue_ci an order PER CuRIA M AFFlRMED kW THOUT Op; &lt CU

On Oc tobes 20 . 2006 bh e AppeJtemt la e_d inbo me Se

Dobreb C~rk of ApperJ ct Mobon For ikkene «nei an

Obje chen / Plec< In A bcke men F clauvunc3 bhck th e_ A ppe_tte e

Court Demed ½e AppeticmF his r×cjht to rcase bhe c>nly

objeckton clurtnc3 bnc i , thed ¼¢_ ¥ncJ coc1rF We_cí to

conac'cl ce hemann$ on Ehe Defencic mcF2on h> suppress

emcAe-nce_ che bo cerruphon m ¼© chcun of cudocdy oF

the emcLence- cmct recguesh ncj ¼¤± the céjechon be_

preserveel for Eurkher appe i t c+e re e

on Nc~ember 10. zoos the secormi o ney c pissueci etn C)rder PEkWIM, Appettc whon for cehear n

anci DEfWiMG Appene Es objezbwn ien m .

On December 04, 2009 ¼2 Secenci p tac} Conck of A e

asued et Memcícde.

On June i2, 2009 bhe Seconel Donck (~r+ cs Appe

rekurned the DECE MB ER. 15 ZO O 7 TE hl V D LUME REco R D be cJe

b th e- FrW cour b . wh'ch conhuned tM copy o f Fhe crycJ

UllDCrMEktT ORDER

SUMMAiq OF THE AR&uMENT

The Appelictnk claims Fhed Fhe conhncjency for fhe

re_view of H,e jucicjment in Fhe insfonF ccæe cd bar

is inFerbmneel webh emel is a componenk of Fhe.

6enkencing by wcty of Fhe lower FrtbuncJs polcjmenk

orcier-s which cieurly sFede by reFerence Fho} bhe

cypexd of Fhe jucigment foHom ½e sentencin5 Jn %e

ins be n t cc s e_ ák bcw bhe Se c onci Dø t ric+ Coc rF cP AppecJ

hcø de_elaced ¼cd Fhe- Tune 7, 200~7 Meci not,ce eS

appecJ vacts " pre tncdore " whtch rnenns by cleMinthon :

6 el 12

"Appectrinej , done , occur tncj or born bebore bhe

sued or correc F hme ; early :

WEBSTERS 11 Mew Rwersteie. Dichonary (1984) pac3e 552.

The -Tune 26, 200¯7 ft ied be t «te_d ne h ce of appecs lSe-e cMo-che.d Exhib<E "A", cJecay meucetted ko ¼¢Secone5 DisFrick Courk of Appecet thcd the AggeJLanE

soucjh fr re m e w o0 bh e " Senten e i ng " however due

be Ehe yetsdte.bonal defec} wikhin Fhe. nohte. of

oppe-cd skahng thab Ehe. Deke.nde rth c†pec is a.i) thejudicwt procee-cüncjs lec'ctm$ up Fo Ehe jury selechan

+ricJ and verdtet cmd finding of guett sente.nce. and

Convtekson in the above s+yteci cause rendered on theO-7* day of $EPTEMBER 2007 the Second PtsfreckCourE of Appeal Issued an order on Jaly to, too.7

whic_h was an abuse_ of' citscre hon ctred prejucLt-ce-d

Fhe. Appellcmbs due- process ricjktk to apped thesenfe_nctng and IF ts bhe Appelícmbs conbe.nhons

thod the re vaas no juctcjme nk oE conu t ch en tuht ch

wets re.ndered on Se†tember 01, tool and ¼cd

since the Dohce does not spectfy a dcde of bhe

renchhon cts re-cjucred by FlortcLes Rede oP

AppeJte±e Procedure- rute 9 9. 110 9)(«) Flondem

S+cduke (1o03) onh khe jury S vercheb te leFF

which is not subjeck to Fhe. Se.cond Disbrick Cour Es

jurtschchon, the Appe.itont betses hts asserhons

on bhe clear ìctn<:jucteje of the ~June. 26, zoca 93t e_a

Betcaed Nobtee oP Appecd which sfcdee on ils

Fetce Ehcd iP bhe. Finding of gutit g,entene.e- and

convteteori are not being constdere d on iy Phe

verdict remains,

The Se.cond Dæketcb Courk oE AppecJ tctst ed)

urts et t c1< on vah en i t edere d (F s -Ju ( y t o , ECO7orcLer SEVERAMC1LLG We judcjment and sente-nce-

beccmse. We- order inc's enter Vatkhouk jurtod'ch°^

anch prejudiced ¼€ A p peJ t an t . See aw«ch e d Ea t

T of 18

GROLiMD O M E

THE APPELLANT CLAIMS THAT THE SECOMO DISTRtCTCouRT CKED UB ECT MATTER UuRtSDLcTzou AALDACTED D TS UTHoR t Ty THE PRE MATL(R EMOTttE PEAL OU&HT AN APPEAL OF THE UURNSVERDic.T TTER lÃ1tTHottT THE SECOMO DlSTRtCTCouRT OF APPEALS UURiSDitT/oM.

STAMDARD OF REVtE\ÃJ

This MonoccebAe CourF should reutew th e Second Disbrick

Court oE Appecds dec.tston on how if Frecded Appellembs

re mcJrure nohce o€ eippe_cd under bhe reo.son ctbl e -

he-ss tes f pursucm+ to bhis courks rw incj tn

Canctkans v Canc&arts , 362 So 1197, [203 (Ficel980)to ciekerm i n e i F the- O te rr tch CoárE abus e-cl i ks c'ubh o

A R Cr UM E WT

-The Appelícmk clcums Fhe k bhe Uune_ 7-6, 20o~l

R Leet Betcete.d Mohe-e_ of Appecd was so desecMue

c k ½e. Secone) Dtskrick Court oP Appeed cocad noF

mctke a proper dekermtncion thak Fhe Appeticmb

wcts se_ekincj an ctppecd of the. se-nbe_nca nej cis ¼2

jucLcjme-n k becccuse. ½e nobt c e- Sbcde s o n i fs Ñce

Ehed ½e. orde.r beancj oppecd wo-s rende re-cí on

Geptembe:r 07, zoo7, because. of Fhis de£ec} khe

A ppe i lcm V vaas prejuch c-e- when M'e- Se-con cl Otskr'ck

Courb issued lbs TuAy to . 7007 orcier sko}ing Ehed

the cippecd woutcl be. OE Fhe_ uacjment only' and

not Phe senkenconcj ½ts order conktcks wtFh fhts

courbs ruhncj in lÃ1(\li ams v Sbctfe-, 3241 SøZd 74(Flct. 1975);

8 oF1%

(W]e also boid Shed et nohce oE cippe-od whtch is

pre.medure.l Etied shedi not be. subje..cE Fo

dismissed . Pictfhe-r suc-h c' nc>hce of "PPecd ShcdejusE m a skcde. oF "limbo" un+ juctcjrne_nk mthe res pe ch w e ciuil or crim e ocJ cctse- is re.nderecl.

A¥ ½e_ hme_ op penchhon , me_ nohee of etppeosho.l\ mcdure and ehed\ vask jurtsdtchon in the

cg e U ct t- e- c-our-b .

-íbe nofLCe O O ecÛ MCLs ko Èe t n CL 6 CL e_ o9

hmbo or m otbeyemee

The_ skcde et beanc3 temparariiy sek cts'desuspe.ns ton .

WEBSTERS 11 tuew R~erstde_ Dte-honc<ry 0984) pg. Z

It is khe Appe.itants ce>nbenhons thed We Fat10,200'T order enbere-d by Phe. Se_cond OtsFrack

Court op AppecJ caused ¼6 nohce of cippecJ to not

be_ heAd in abeyance. pursuctnk to Flortdc~ Rule. of

Appeiio+e Procedure rule. § 9. t to (m) or (1)

Fl or t ches Sbckut e (zoo-5) Se e- cd¾ch e.d E×h t b d " F

Prexncdure_ noh ce_ :

19 a nohce of appecJ is Stieel beEare. rendthon of «

inal creter ½e. appeed sheJi be subject to dismascd

as premcdrure . Howeve_r 19 a hood order ts re_ndered

bePore dtsmissa-1 of ½e pre mabure aPPeod , the

pre_medure_ nohee- eE appecJ ghcd) be e-ons<de_red

eGPe.ekme to ve.s+ jurtscLtchen m We_ c-ourb to

re-utew the. Etncti orden Be_Eore dtsmtssed Ehe

courk in tFs dtscrehen meu permik the lower

ri b un ed to render cv Fm e< \ orde-r .

Th t s eeur F ruled i n ~The Gr re-y h oun d Corp. vCar s wel i , IS \ Se zd o3 6 (Flct (9 (c4 ) ' As a cjemecd

tesf for sufftetency of ci noktce eF appea( is

9 oE 11i5

whethe-r ¼2 nohce oE appecd cjive-s sufEtcc enf

mforma.hon to debermine , w+h a rec'sonable

decjree of cerfettnby ½e order bein$ appealed.The AppeJlctnF ho-s conducked eׇensme research

to kind cctse 10 in Hms courir electrly shcæncj

½cst ½ts cour F he's c(de\ress th ts issue etnci

hets founc\ none. , 'The. de.cas c on of ½e Seco nci

Otstrtek Cocwb oF Appecd does however conÑ tc¼

Nifh fbts Courbs PLthinc S . 6e.e Nohle v SEceke, as3

So2d 8)9 on remma 374 .2d til(, (Fh 1977) Wherethts courE ruled ,{E]ven thoc-'c3h nohce oP aPP*cdfor reuttva of judc3ment and conutchen anet chd

nok inform pache-s cmd courb kheth deSe-ncicinE

soucjk F rew te eP seJence_ cana etse ccjn men b oE

error spec 19t ed khed evtdence_ wcts insaßGtetenFo Sttsbet(n Conv(cÂr on , Where- libicjo+fon IMcts

ro perly telenhÊte.d in ¼€_ nohce_, allecjedsenbencine error of impostng ct sptik senbe_nce

wtFh de9e-netemb servtnej miktcel Ehrte. ye_ars wi¼no cre.dtb for cjooch hme or cjcun 'hme. and twoye-ars on probctfcan was (tsteci in scgle-menkcd

asstc3n me_nks oP error anct no prejudtcx

re_su( Fed fro m cíe fe.ch oe_ noh ce etp p L i LctGe. courkshould hctue- constdered se_nbencanej error, In¼¢ tnsbemb ccese_ cd bctr , ½e. nohce oF c†pecJ

on ibs Þctce. Se-e_ ctWctched E>chdoiE " A " plaml

s tcete-s ¼cd me_ A p pe i t c<n F soug h b ct rem e w o

e se.nke-ne c ncj s Obher courbs hcw e ruled mtim¥ee SbcJres w Curry -7bo F,1ci 10~79 (c.A.15(Flct') 19 85 ) Pre mckurt nob ce o E c†P ecd fo ll°-nCj

jury verdtc+ of cjeu\E bu¥ prtor to senke-ncincj and

beÞo re juckcjme n f o f con v t c.h on w e re eEe'e2

was e.EPe_c-bive to perGec.b ctppecd cts o9 ¼(se-nfe-nce- was entered as ¥he juchcjmenk , canci khe

Mtcjk Courk rwed in Bermcun y , llniked ShcJres, 302

U.S . 2)( E12 'Z13 SS S.Ct . 164 , f (c, SZ LEcl Id

10 of 1%

204 (1934Úl]n a enmined ectse ¼¢ Encd jaclemed mectns ½e eenbence. . The se.nbence is

½e jucLc3menE . In ¼6 insÉcen F ca.se_ edr bete ½e_

~June Z6, 7-007 Belcde-d Mottce_ of' Appecd ispre-mcdure tn ½ve tures k since. becctuse en ½e

dake_ ik wees Rt ed iF reSexresj to etn order khed

¼6 AppeMan V bebemed wo.s cymc3 to be renderect

on Sep te m be.r 07 , 7.A07 but n o ettc h orete.r was

ever re-nde-rect , IF ts noF cAear why me Second

D'e trt cA Cottrk oE Appecd e.hes e_ Fo tre_ed ¼¢AppeMctnk s cose (neJPere_n bly as tir hetd o½er

similari situcded ectse_s CML y Skede., ~7t4 S.Zd4'79 , 4 88 m. l'L (Flo_ APp Znd Ots+ 1998)(cippecJ eftonutc¥ton and senbe.nce_ premcdure be.cause_ bhey

heta nok bem re-naered by Altncj o9 a etcjnedAtrthen order buk appeScde- jurtsebckton vesbedonce khe orde-r vucts renderecb) Se che.r v Shake695 G-2d 440 (Fla App 2nd Otsk zoos)+he. Appemcwclatms fhed ¼6 5e cond Dis krtel Courts in Fer pr e ted t o n

of ¼€ Tune 26, loca Belede.s Mohce_ eF Appecd wasin error and conßtteks tw bh a rutine in etnokhez

Diskrab Cettrk Set Mctnnol v Sbcee, 402 S 2d 565(FL<t Ap p 5 Otsk 198t) Where. Fhe nohce of etppecJpropor+ed to ctppecd an order whtch bokk pctrhe.s

ac3reed bucts nok re-ndere-d in khe- re.cord, smeeno suc.h order extsk only me_ jury s vesteite F

remettns a vesched ts nok appeedctbie_ See.Smibh v, $kcde , 395 S>1d 575 (FLce App 5 D<s¥1981'); BurkeH- v Sbcde, 400 Smzd las (fic App5 Diet 193)) the etppecJ showes be atsmtsseci due

¼ ct lete k e t s u. bj ed medFer jums ch cha n o E H,e

/\A cq 03, 20D1 jury s verd t c¥ .

Becctu3e Flonac, Rute of Appell<de Proceaure rute

§9.1)O (4) (a) Flometc, StakuFe (zoo3) cloes speedy H,e

conkenbs of H,e nohce oF oppecut as to M,e_ dcde_

of renclt bon not mony courbs hewe_ enforced ½is

11 oF 1%

junsdteboncd recruiremenb cma dismtssed cPPeoJ5

due to omission of fhe dc'FE ° °° '^the nohce_ of cppecJ stmply beccuse the apetilc'nb

feuts to cer bFy the benePiEs aWe.eke.d by We- appeeJ.

The judtetcel rule the F hets evoive-d is EhesE tÞ ½e

nohce cjtue-s Sufftclenf informc'hon From whtc+ ib

can be defermmeci , wiFh et rectsoncubte. degree ofcerfcunty , which order is betncj cippecJed techniccddefec.f3 in khe nohce Fhcd neafher cdFed the Cour+S

jansdtchon nor mislec'dS or Frejudice etny pctrky in

the_ ctchon bhe_ nohce_ noalet not be dtsmtese_d Sex

Harde.n v Sbo+e , 829 Sal 324 (P(ct App 7-nd Dist 1°°E-)(Defendem¥s omtsston oP cctee number from noh ce of

appe_cú vacts ci fechniccd cleGeck ¼cd dtd nok take.

caucq appeRctte jurisdic-bon be-ec'use if dtd noF mts lead

or prepdice- Fetche s and bezo_use. Fhe. no hc-e_ e9

appecJ c31ve suPFtcie_n b mformcthon to etebermme kubh

re ctsonc b le certcun ty ¼¢ orde.r bea ncj o p peed e d ) Pri o r

to he_ fion,dc Lecjisiabors encmbncj ibs amendmenf Fo

Fioreca Rutes 09 Appellc+e Procedure rule- § 9.llo (d)

½e FtPFW Distock Courb of AppecJ mcœLL a ru(t ruj in

Hctnyt<th v S¾¼, 402 Sø2cl 555 (Etcn App 5 Otsk 081')In whic-h bhe courk rsuied bhcet chsmtsscs ( iAtc's (uc reanked

were_ khe nah ce of og pecd does no b Spet i E y ctn ord tr

¼cd acts re.ncLered on etny deke oP retoed and ½enoktte pro porbed to appecd ½e jurys ve_rche-f , It (s

½e AppenanEs contenbons fhed in ¼6 msbc'nk cc'st

ce betr ½e June 2G , 2001 SetcJed ALohce oÞ APPecJ$

langucteje on its Eace shotus bhcd if ¼€ fmdeng of guM

se.ntence. ad convtc:hon cire not betng constde-red

½en only He verdict is leß remcunmcj cnd ¼€Second Distrteb Court of AppecJ ectme bo ½ts sume

e.onctusion wi¼en iks ,rch 8, 10la resPonse in co-Se

number 6C11-2193 on F*cJ'- 3 » ** ""cJ"°'S*- ° +"*nohte of oppecu in ¼( inslcmf ec'se c5 har does

proporb to appecd ¼€ jurys verdick whic-h is mcdter

12of LB

without the Second Disteter C.ourt of Appeo is jurischchon

The ~Jul y 10 . 2007 order See a%ched Exh>bd "B"

cutcwed the. June 2G, zool Beloke-d Nohte of Appecd tono lonc3e-r con·btnue to be a premedure no-hee of

appecs( , the- dehnthon oE Fhe word " premcdure.">s

Appectrincj , done , occurtnc or born beEore +he

usuod or correcA hme. ; ecer1y ;

1ALESSTERS 11 Meva Rweestae Otchon«ny on4) P°uSe552.

Ather Fhe Se.cend Disketc ir courb of Appeca h«dente_red tbs Uu\y 10, zool order it conhnueci to

des er t be khe Tun e. 26, zool Be.Lede d No h c e_ o €

Ap pe-oA a s be m " pre mekure " ev e n ¼oug h ¼«

order mwhte-h i datme_d the_ nohee- wets appealfrom tS dcete-d 1½cq 03, 2007 approxime,\y rnppy_

four(54) clays PR10R to the nohce_ bean$ Med.

Thts ts preheeps a frtreb impre-eston ease one_ oE

wh t e_h th e3 courk he's neuex s e-e_n or hectrd oE beFere..

Here we_ ho-ve- et DisFrtc+ Courk which hets blatemHy

che re cjetreled nob only ½t s c-our t s ruh ncj (n N tTi i'amsv. Skcete, 324 S.2d 74 ( Fta iC)75) but cdso Flortelc

Rule oE Appellabe Procedure rule § 9.lto troloe U)

FL oeiclet S bc+u Ee- (1003) of Fh e proce-eLuccJ

re-qwre.me-nbs of the- rtcjhFs oE Phe ceccused who

hets premckure Frde-d ct nohce_ oE cippeed . This

hets re_su_\beet an the Appeltembs Due_ proce» and

Ecçuca Probeclon Reghbs wktch are guceranteeel be

be probe.cked by Phe Llmbec\ Ebcdes and Flortdcs

Coneh k uh o n to be corn pro mis e-ci , On\y m cer bam

unusuod orcumsEcmces will thus courb tc&e achon

by wcty of an extraorchnetry wrtF, those carcum_

stance s ctre_ 1P there- hcts be.e_n et e.le-ctr rnarufesk

mjusFtte , in the_ insfank ectse_ cd bctr i t is

ende_nF thetF such achon musb be. bc'ken in

order to correek et Ymsectertage_ of pehee_.

(3 of IB

COhl CLUS lo Al

The Appett«nb te enh He d ¥0 cm order vacc5ne and

seMtncj etsLde. ½e dectston m Witilams v StaEe, 4 Sc3d

lE3(o (Fia App lnd Disk 200S) case numbe.c 2D07-3242

due_ to We. Se.conci Districk Court of Appeal nob hovcnc

subjec} medte r jun s a t c h e n by way of th e 'Jun e. 2/o,

2OO'l nobtce of ctFgecel anci an orde.r cjranhng a

SeJoke.d Dire.cl Appecd of BD H hts crimincJ ease-5

number CRCO358883 CFA MO CRCO3t BBS4 CFAMO

. omtk

Klinte sbned wnuams

CERTiFi CATE OF SERV) C_E

1 Wutie Skanc,5 WMioms 00 HERESN CERTtFN Hoed on

¼is Ñ dcg of DEC EMBER TOi2 pursuan f to FLA .

8, APP, P § C).420 Fla. Skcd . (20cm thab cx true_ one o

e,orreck copy o9 the_ Forego,n$ Agge.ite nEs /Amended

In t Fi cd Sr(e f has bee-n pub mko ½e hand s oP ¼€_ Sbole

of Fiortaas DeparbrnenE oE Correchens mcd room

p·ersona( for mad inc3 ts Mrs . Pctm To Sond:, Akrorney

Geneced ed ¼6 Concourse Center # 4 , 350.7 Ects b

Frontacje Road Sæte 200, Tamp« F(ortch 33bb~7 cmd

to ½e Honora ble Jame s Birkhsid , EteA oE khe Courk

Seco d D,3krtcA Court of Appe»( , IDOS Eask MemortcJ

Bou e rc\ LcAedand Fleetck« 33602 0327 .

14 of it

N THE CIRCUIT COUNTY COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR PINELLAS COUNTY FLORIDA

CRIAIINAL FELONY DIVISION-M

UCN (S) REF (S) APPEAL (S)522003CF0Z8883XXXXNO CRC0318883CFANO

STATE OF FLORIDA v WILLIE S. WILLIAMSPlanitff INDIGENT SPN:00098051

Defendant

APPELLANTS PRO'SE NOTICE OF BELATED APPEAL .

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the above named Defendant WILLIF S.

WILLIAMS moves this Honorable Court under the provisions of both Article 1 6.

and, Article V, section 4 and 5, Florida Constitution, Florida Rules ofAppellant

Procedure Rule § 9.104 (b) (1) (A) Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure Rules [924.05

and § 924.06 to take judicial notice pursuant to Florida Criminal Appellate Rule 6.2 and

Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure Rule § 3.600 (b) (5) & (8) the Defendant appeals the

investigation and apprehension, arrest along with all the judicial proceedings leading up

to the jury selection trial and verdict and finding of guilt sentence and conviction in the

above styled cause rendered on the day of ΀fÑMÉ €F 2007 at the

Criminal Justice Center 14250 49'" Street North, in the City of Clearwater, Pinellas

County Florida

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN on this day of June 2007.

WILLIE S. WILLIAMS

CMißtT A

5 of LS

UNAUTHORIZED / AUTHORIZED SWORN Or

STATE OF FLORIDA

COUNTY OF PINELLAS

BEFORE ME the undersigned authority on this day

personal appeared /Vf i ¢ P// ///rfÂJ who first b

says that he understands that the penalty for knowingly making ant false

include fines or, imprisonment or both and, that he is the appellant / affic

above styled cause, is personal known to me / or has produced as identifi

County Jail Inmate Identification Card # his date of

'~/// f., O who after taking an oath swearing under the penalty c

that he has read or has a personal knowledge of the facts and matters stat

foregoing APPELLANTS NOTICE OF BELATED APPEAL and the

facts and matters stated herein are both true and correct.

AFFIRMANT

i Y/,P IC

. . S. ChristlaraMYCOMMISSION# DD262

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY before the undersigned witnesses on this day

of 2007 that a true and correct copy of the foregoing NOTICE

OF BELATED APPEAL has been handed to Sheriff Deputies of the Pinellas County

Jail Complex who oversee the delivery of out going legal mail to a designated U.S. Postal

Mail Carrier for the purpose ofproper mailing via Per-paid First Class Postal Mailing to

1700the Branch Offices of the Clerk of the Second District Court James Birkhold atM

Tampa Florida 33602-3547 and to the Offices ofBill McCollum,

Attorney General Branch Office at 3507 East Frontage Road Suite 200 Tampa Florida

33602 AND THE Offices of Bernie McCabe Jr. State Attomey Criminal Justice Center

14250 49 Street North Clearwater Florida 33762

WITNESS

WITNES

WILLIE S. WILLIAMS

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDASECOND DISTRICT, POST OFFICE BOX 327, LAKELAND, FL 33802-0327

July 10, 2007

CASE NO.: 2D07-3242L.T. No. : CRC 03-18883 CFANO

Willie S. Williams v. State Of Florida

Appellant / Petitioner(s), Appellee / Respondent(s).

BY ORDER OF THE COURT:

This will proceed as a pro se appeal of the judgment of May 3, 2007. If the

appellant wishes to appeal his sentence once imposed, he must initiate an additionalappeal.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of the original court order.

Served:

Willie S. Williams Attorney General Ken Burke, Clerk

bj

James BirkholdClerk