ALLON NAVARRO
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court lacks jurisdiction to consider a motion to withdraw plea filed after the defendant has filed a notice of appeal, and must dismiss rather than deny such a motion.
[1] A trial court lacks jurisdiction to consider a motion to withdraw a guilty plea that is filed after the defendant has filed a notice of appeal and must dismiss such a mot…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“where appellant filed his pro se motion to withdraw plea after he filed his notice of appeal, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the motion and should have dismissed rather than denied it”
Court citing Mingo v. State, 914 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) to explain the proper procedural requirement
Allon Navarro was convicted of driving while license suspended or revoked (second or subsequent offense). After filing his notice of appeal, Navarro f…
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 Anders V. California Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Allon Navarro challenges his judgment and sentence for driving while license suspended or revoked (second or subsequent offense). While we affirm Navarro's judgment and sentence, we remand with directions for the trial court to withdraw its earlier order denying Navarro's pro se motion to withdraw plea and to instead enter an order dismissing the motion. See Mingo v. State, 914 So. 2d 1070, 1070 (Fla.
2
2d DCA 2005) (explaining that where appellant filed his pro se motion to withdraw plea after he filed his notice of appeal, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the motion and should have dismissed rather than denied it). Our affirmance is without prejudice to Navarro's right to file a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Affirmed; remanded with directions.
SILBERMAN, MORRIS, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Mingo v. State, 914 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)