TIMOTHY V. SUMMERS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The trial court had jurisdiction to consider the motion because the criminal appeal had been dismissed prior to the trial court's ruling.
Summers sought to collaterally attack his conviction via a Rule 3.850 motion. The trial court denied the motion, believing it lacked jurisdiction due …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Pending Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
W. SHARP, Judge.
Summers appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, in which he sought to collaterally attack his conviction for second degree murder. He filed his motion on April 3, 1997, and the trial court denied it on April 7, 1997. The trial court thought it lacked jurisdiction to consider the motion because Summers had appealed the criminal conviction and the appeal was still pending. We reverse.
On March 20, 1997, in an unpublished order, this court dismissed Summer’s criminal appeal in response to the public defender’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal filed on March 18, 1997. Summers v. State, No. 96-3616 (Fla. 5th DCA Mar. 20, 1997). No mandate was issued, but a notice of the dismissal was mailed to the trial court on April 7, 1997, by coincidence, the same day it dismissed Summer’s 3.850 motion. Unlike E-Mail or facsimile, the U.S. mail is not nearly instantaneous, although it is the mode we rely upon to communicate on official business. Thus, through no fault of its own, the trial court was not aware of the dismissal of the appeal before it ruled.
Since the criminal appeal was dismissed on March 20, 1997, the trial judge had jurisdiction to consider Summer’s 3.850 motion on the merits at the time Summers filed the motion on April 3,1997, as well as at the time the trial court dismissed the motion on April 7, 1997. Accordingly, we reverse and remand so that the trial court can address Summer’s 3.850 claims on the merits. See, e.g., Reed v. State, 610 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).
REVERSED and REMANDED.
DAUKSCH and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bynum v. State, 784 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)…r 22, 2000. Thus, on January 3, [*556] 2001, when the circuit court ruled in this cause, it had jurisdiction. Accordingly, we reverse and remand so that the circuit court can address Bynum’s 3.850 motion on the merits. See, e.g., Summers v. State, 695 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997). REVERSED and REMANDED. SAWAYA and PLEUS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Dean v. Dean, 610 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- Reed v. State, 610 So. 2d 736 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)