CECIL SHYRON KING v. STATE OF FLORIDA

Reset A A Font size: Print

Supreme Court of Florida.

CECIL SHYRON KING Appellant/Petitioner v. STATE OF FLORIDA Appellee/Respondent

CASE NOS.: SC16-1263

Decided: February 24, 2017

This cause is before this Court on King's appeal of the denial of a motion granting in part and denying in part King's Verified Motion for Postconviction DNA Testing And/Or Running Any Existing Profiles Through CODIS pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853 and a petition for review of a non-final order denying King's Verified Motion for Postconviction Latent Print Testing and Examination.1 We have considered the issues raised, and affirm the thorough and well-reasoned order of the postconviction court denying in part and granting in part King's Verified Motion for Postconviction DNA Testing And/Or Running Any Existing Profiles Through CODIS.

As to King's petition seeking review of the postconviction court's well-reasoned order denying King's Verified Motion for Postconviction Latent Print Testing and Examination, because this Court does not have certiorari jurisdiction, we have treated the petition as an appeal of a non-final order in a capital postconviction proceeding. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.142(c); Trepal v. State, 754 So. 2d 702 (Fla. 2000). The requirements of that rule mirror the requirements for certiorari relief. We deny relief because we conclude that King has failed to show why the order departs from the essential requirements of law and how the order may cause material injury for which there is no adequate remedy on appeal. Accordingly, the petition is denied.

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED.

A True Copy

Test:

John A. Tomasino Clerk, Supreme Court

cd

Served:

CARINE L. EMPLIT

GONZALO ANDUX

HON. MARK HARRISON MAHON, CHIEF JUDGE

HON. MALLORY DURDEN COOPER, JUDGE

HON. RONNIE FUSSELL, CLERK

BERNARDO ENRIQUE DE LA RIONDA

FOOTNOTES

1.   Because the issues of both cases are interrelated, we consolidate both cases for the purposes of disposition.

LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, and LAWSON, JJ., concur.

Copied to clipboard