Background
Gregory Harris appealed an order of the Hillsborough County Circuit Court in a postconviction proceeding under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2). Circuit Judge Michelle Sisco entered the order under review.
The Second District initially issued an opinion affirming the postconviction court on August 26, 2026. Harris’s initial brief was deemed filed under the mailbox rule on August 25, but the appellate court did not receive it until August 31 and therefore had not considered it before issuing the original opinion.
The Court’s Holding
The Second District accepted Harris’s initial brief as filed, withdrew its August 26 opinion, and substituted a new opinion after considering the brief.
In the substituted per curiam opinion, the court affirmed the postconviction court’s order without further explanation.
Key Takeaways
- A filing deemed timely under the mailbox rule may warrant reconsideration when the court issued its decision before receiving the document.
- The Second District withdrew its earlier opinion and considered Harris’s initial brief before issuing the substituted opinion.
- After reviewing the brief, the court again affirmed the postconviction order in an unexplained per curiam decision.
Why It Matters
The order shows how Florida’s mailbox rule can affect appellate procedure when a prisoner’s filing is deemed filed before it physically reaches the court. Here, the court corrected the procedural problem by withdrawing its prior decision and considering the brief.
The ultimate result did not change: the postconviction order remained affirmed. Because the substituted opinion provides no reasoning, it establishes no stated substantive rationale beyond the disposition of Harris’s appeal.