Taylor v. State

PER CURIAM.

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus because the circuit court has recently granted petitioner leave to amend his pending motion for post-conviction relief. See Munn v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 807 So.2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). However,, we encourage the circuit court to continue its efforts to expeditiously dispose of the *992motion pending below. Wilson v. State, 775 So.2d 1003 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).

BENTON, CLARK, and SWANSON, JJ., concur.