VONTAVIOUS TERNARD LAMBERT, ET AL., APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• FOX v. State, 166 So. 3d 894 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)
  …46 So. 2d 660, 661 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Once the thirty-day window passes, “the trial court loses jurisdiction, and ‘[a][d]efendant cannot confer jurisdiction [*896] on the trial court by waiver, acquiescence, estoppel or consent.’ ” Golden v. State, 84 So. 3d 396, 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (quoting State v. Schafer, 583 So. 2d 374, 376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)). Appellant’s December 2011 rule 3.170(1) motion was therefore untimely, having been filed more than a year after sentencing. The trial court’s December 8,…
• Cornelius v. State, 223 So. 3d 398 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)
  …o se pleadings by adopting them. Logan, 846 So. 2d at 475; Harden, 152 So. 3d at 627; Sams, 849 So. 2d at 1174. However,, adoption of the pro se demand and the other pleadings should be a matter that is presented to the trial court. Golden v. State, 84 So. 3d 396, 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Craven, 955 So. 2d at 1184. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.191 provides that the trial court must comply with certain time requirements, which necessarily requires that the trial court know that a demand has been made…
• Isla v. State, 185 So. 3d 695 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)
  …PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. See Golden v. State, 84 So. 3d 396, 398 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012) (“Assuming arguendo that the trial court properly allowed Golden’s counsel- to adopt'the pro se motion, the effective- date of an adopted pro se motion is the date it is adopted- and not the initial date the unauthorized ple…

Authorities Cited

• Flagg v. State, 74 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
• Holmes v. State, 74 So. 3d 138 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)
• State v. Adkins, 71 So. 3d 117 (Fla. 2011)