EVANS DARLING, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
EVANS DARLING, JR., APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
799 So. 2d 346
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2001)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The trial court denied as successive the appellant’s Rule 3.800(a) motion, filed while an appeal of the appellant’s previous Rule 3.800(a) motion was pending in this Court. The trial court should have dismissed the motion for lack of jurisdiction. See Williams v. State, 795 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Accordingly, we vacate the order denying the motion and remand for the trial court to dismiss the motion.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK and POLSTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Betts v. State, 829 So. 2d 977 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…ineffective assistance of counsel as in his second motion, the denial of which was pending in this Court at the time the trial court ruled on the third motion, the trial court was without jurisdiction to rule on this third motion. Darling v. State, 799 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McKeever v. State, 808 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Under such circumstances, the trial court was required to dismiss the appellant’s third motion for lack of jurisdiction. See id. The appellant’s fourth motion does not raise…
-
McCLINTOCK v. State, 817 So. 2d 1082 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…heet. Because the appellant had raised these same issues in an earlier motion, the denial of which was pending in this Court at the time the trial court ruled on the instant claims, the trial court was without jurisdiction to rule. Darling v. State, 799 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); McKeever v. State, 808 So. 2d 286 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Under such circumstances, the trial court was required to dismiss the appellant’s motion for lack of jurisdiction. See id. We accordingly reverse the order denying relief…
Authorities Cited
- Clark v. State, 795 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)