Nunc Pro Tunc Order

729 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 109 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Llerena v. United States
  508 F.2d 78· 5th Cir.· 1975-02-14 ·cited 44×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  The court held that a sentencing court has the authority to correct an illegal sentence, even after the defendant has begun serving it, to comply with mandatory statutory requirements, and this does not violate double jeopardy protections.
• Lavina Torockio v. Chamberlain MFG. Co.
  456 F.2d 1084· 3d Cir.· 1972-03-13 ·cited 44×
  The district court may, at any time, consider a motion to validate a late-filed notice of appeal within sixty days of judgment for excusable neglect, and to this extent, prior case law is overruled.
• Reynolds v. State
  177 So. 3d 296· Fla. 1st DCA· 2015-10-06 ·cited 43×
  The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed a probation revocation and sentence, holding that the trial court committed reversible error by accepting the defendant's plea to a probation violation without first holding a competency hearing, despite having appointed an expe
• Cotton v. State
  177 So. 3d 666· Fla. 1st DCA· 2015-10-12 ·cited 42×
  The court held that a conviction cannot stand if the record does not affirmatively show the defendant was competent to proceed, requiring a remand to establish competency.
• Carson v. State
  489 So. 2d 1236· Fla. 2d DCA· 1986-06-13 ·cited 42×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Correction
  Scott Carson appeals an amended sentence after he was erroneously discharged from prison. The court affirmed the trial court's authority to correct the clerical error in the credit for time served, but reversed and remanded to ensure Carson received credit for the period he was a
• Dezso John Lokos v. Capps
  625 F.2d 1258· 5th Cir.· 1980-09-18 ·cited 42×
  The court held that the Alabama trial court violated the petitioner's constitutional rights by failing to conduct an adequate inquiry into his competency to stand trial, and that the petitioner was in fact incompetent.
• Selph v. Council OF the City OF LOS Angeles
  593 F.2d 881· 9th Cir.· 1979-03-22 ·cited 42×
  The court held that it lacked jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not filed within the time prescribed by Rule 4(a), F.R.A.P., and the district court improperly granted an untimely extension.
• Haskell Liberman and Leatrice Liberman v. Rhyne
  248 So. 2d 242· Fla. 3d DCA· 1971-04-27 ·cited 42×
  The court held that a partial summary judgment improperly entered as a final judgment must be reversed, and an order entered ex parte after an appeal has been filed is void.
• Ricou v. Merwin
  94 Fla. 86· Fla.· 1927-06-28 ·cited 41×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Correction
  This case addresses whether an amendment to a final decree to correct a clerical error constitutes a new final decree, thereby affecting the timeliness of an appeal. The court held that such an amendment does not create a new final decree and relates back to the original decree's
• Presley v. State
  199 So. 3d 1014· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-06-29 ·cited 40×
  Antonio Presley appeals the denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea and vacate his sentences, arguing the trial court fundamentally erred by holding a hearing on these motions without first conducting a competency hearing after he had been adjudicated incompetent and sub
• Mayes v. Moore
  827 So. 2d 967· Fla.· 2002-09-19 ·cited 40×
  The court held that petitioners are not entitled to relief because the conditional release statute is not a recidivist statute requiring prior notice, the Parole Commission's authority does not violate separation of powers, the statute is not a bill of attainder, and the forfeitu
• Lewis v. B.F. Goodrich Co.
  850 F.2d 641· 10th Cir.· 1988-07-05 ·cited 40×
  A premature notice of appeal is effective if a subsequent Rule 54(b) certification is obtained or a final adjudication occurs before the court considers the appeal.
• Boggs v. Honorable Louie L. Wainwright
  223 So. 2d 316· Fla.· 1969-05-21 ·cited 40×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Correction
  A nunc pro tunc correction of a clerical error in a sentence, striking language that would have made it run concurrently, means the sentence is governed by the statute requiring consecutive service unless otherwise directed.
• Fanchon & Marco, Inc. v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.
  202 F.2d 731· 2d Cir.· 1953-03-09 ·cited 40×
• Kendrick Silver v. State
  193 So. 3d 991· Fla. 4th DCA· 2016-05-25 ·cited 39×
  The court held that a conviction must be vacated if the trial court failed to hold a competency hearing after appointing experts, as this constitutes ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.
• Taylor v. Chapman
  127 Fla. 401· Fla.· 1937-03-02 ·cited 39×
  The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a habeas corpus order remanding William A. Taylor to custody, holding that an information charging him with attempted false personation and fraud against Western Union sufficiently alleged an offense despite certain technical deficiencies. The c
• United States v. Smith
  869 F.2d 348· 7th Cir.· 1989-02-21 ·cited 38×
  The court held that spectrographic voice identification expert testimony is admissible under the Frye standard if a proper foundation is laid, and that the defendant's Confrontation Clause rights were not violated by the use of a substitute expert who relied on spectrograms prepa
• Wheat v. Thigpen
  793 F.2d 621· 5th Cir.· 1986-06-27 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the Mississippi Supreme Court's procedural bar was not adequate and independent, allowing federal review of the Eighth Amendment claim, and that the petitioner was competent to stand trial.
• In re Triangle Chems., Inc. v. Hensley
  697 F.2d 1280· 5th Cir.· 1983-02-18 ·cited 38×
  A bankruptcy court has discretion, as a court of equity, to enter a nunc pro tunc order approving an attorney's employment even after services have been rendered, provided proper showing is made.
• United States v. Makris
  483 F.2d 1082· 5th Cir.· 1973-08-14 ·cited 38×
  The court held that the conviction on Count I for perjury must be reversed due to insufficient proof of a specific falsehood, and that a competency hearing under 18 U.S.C. § 4244 was improperly denied.
• United States ex rel. Edward Mitchell v. Hon. Harold Follette
  358 F.2d 922· 2d Cir.· 1966-02-25 ·cited 38×
  The court held that a factual hearing is mandatory to determine if the state trial judge's silence after the defendant expressed a desire to appeal, coupled with the defendant's indigence, unconstitutionally deprived him of his right to appeal.
• Huff v. United States
  192 F.2d 911· 5th Cir.· 1951-11-23 ·cited 37×
  The court held that the clerk's failure to provide notice of an order does not extend the time for filing an appeal, and a conspiracy is a continuing offense subject to penalty increases if the crime continues after the penalty statute is amended.
• In re Orbitec Corp. v. Schindler
  520 F.2d 358· 2d Cir.· 1975-07-31 ·cited 36×
  A motion for an extension of time to file a notice of appeal cannot substitute for the notice of appeal itself, even if the motion alleges excusable neglect.
• Vale v. Bonnett
  191 F.2d 334· D.C. Cir.· 1951-06-07 ·cited 36×
  A nunc pro tunc order can cure defects in the entry of judgment for appeal purposes, and summary judgment was improperly granted due to unresolved material factual issues regarding negligence and liability.
• United States v. Hill
  447 F.2d 817· 7th Cir.· 1971-08-12 ·cited 35×
  The dissenting judge believes the exclusionary rule should apply to probation revocation proceedings and that the search in question was unreasonable under ordinary standards.
• Powers v. The NEW York Cent. R.R. Co.
  251 F.2d 813· 2d Cir.· 1958-01-15 ·cited 35×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  The court should direct judgment nunc pro tunc to allow interest from the date of the jury verdict or erroneous judgment.
• MSP Recovery Claims v. QBE Holdings, Inc.
  965 F.3d 1210· 11th Cir.· 2020-07-15 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the Addendum was inadmissible parol evidence, and while the Nunc Pro Tunc Assignment could retroactively confer standing, the Series Assignment did not convey rights under it to the plaintiffs. Therefore, the plaintiffs lacked standing.
• Holland v. State
  185 So. 3d 636· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-02-05 ·cited 34×
  Cody Shane Holland appeals his burglary conviction, arguing he was denied due process because the trial court failed to independently determine his competency to stand trial. The Second District Court of Appeal affirms the conviction and sentence but remands for entry of a writte
• Matthews v. State
  736 So. 2d 72· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-06-09 ·cited 34×
  Rosemarie Matthews appeals an order revoking her probation for child abuse. The court affirms the revocation, holding that a probationer who accepts probation conditions cannot challenge their legality on appeal from a revocation order, that sufficient evidence supports the willf
• McGRAW-Edison Co. v. Preformed Line Prods. Co.
  362 F.2d 339· 9th Cir.· 1966-05-26 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing a patent infringement counterclaim without prejudice, considering the pendency of related litigation in another district court.
• Alexander v. Nash-Kelvinator Corp.
  271 F.2d 524· 2d Cir.· 1959-11-02 ·cited 34×
  The court held that the district court erred in its procedure after remand and in its calculation of damages, particularly regarding prospective loss of earnings and the discount rate used. The court re-evaluated the damages and set new, lower amounts.
• Fla. E. Coast Ry. Co. v. Peters
  77 Fla. 411· Fla.· 1919-04-17 ·cited 34×
  Florida East Coast Railway Company appealed a judgment for special damages awarded to Peters, a tomato farmer, for the railway's negligent delay in transporting crate material needed for harvesting and shipping his crop. The court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding th
• Williams v. Bernhardt Bros. Tugboat Serv., Inc.
  357 F.2d 883· 7th Cir.· 1966-03-25 ·cited 32×
  A district court cannot enter a nunc pro tunc certification of finality for an order after an appeal has already been taken to the court of appeals.
• State v. Lummus
  111 Fla. 746· Fla.· 1933-08-10 ·cited 32×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Correction
  Ranger Realty Co. sought mandamus relief to compel tax officials and a newspaper publisher to correct irregularities in tax assessment and sale proceedings for a 1928 tax certificate purchase. The Florida Supreme Court held that state law imposed a continuing duty on tax officers
• THE Florida BAR v. Camp
  626 So. 2d 691· Fla.· 1993-11-04 ·cited 31×
• Amoco Overseas OIL Co. v. Compagnie Nationale Algerienne de Navigation ("C. N. A. N.") and T/S IN Amenas
  605 F.2d 648· 2d Cir.· 1979-07-19 ·cited 31×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to reopen the default judgment, as the jurisdictional challenges were without merit and the motion was untimely or lacked sufficient grounds for relief.
• Smith v. Smith
  90 Fla. 824· Fla.· 1925-12-16 ·cited 31×
  In this divorce case, the Florida Supreme Court reversed a trial court's award of an additional $750 solicitor's fee to the defendant wife's attorney, holding that such fees awarded in a final decree must be paid to the wife or court clerk, not directly to the attorney, and that
• A. O. Smith Corp. v. Sims Consol. Ltd.
  647 F.2d 118· 10th Cir.· 1981-04-16 ·cited 30×
  A subsequent Rule 54(b) certification does not cure a premature notice of appeal filed before the certification; a new notice of appeal must be filed after the certification.
• Gant v. United States
  161 F.2d 793· 5th Cir.· 1947-04-21 ·cited 30×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Correction
  The court held that a second, consecutive sentence imposed for an offense already punishable by a valid, partially served sentence is illegal and should be expunged.
• United States v. Hoye
  548 F.2d 1271· 6th Cir.· 1977-02-14 ·cited 29×
  The court held that a timely filed motion for delayed appeal can be treated as a substantial compliance with the notice of appeal requirements, and the defendant's sentencing claims were without merit.
• Morton C. Nichols v. Walton
  82 Fla. 385· Fla.· 1921-11-23 ·cited 29×
  The Florida Supreme Court held that a nunc pro tunc order extending the deadline for filing a bill of exceptions after the term had expired could be valid if it properly memorialized an order that was actually made by the trial judge during the term but inadvertently omitted from
• THE Florida BAR v. Walkden
  950 So. 2d 407· Fla.· 2007-02-22 ·cited 28×
  The Florida Supreme Court held John L. Walkden in contempt and disbarred him for five years for repeatedly practicing law while suspended, continuing to do so even after disciplinary proceedings were initiated and a one-year suspension imposed. The Court found Walkden's pattern o
• Rothman v. United States
  508 F.2d 648· 3d Cir.· 1975-01-31 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a pro se prisoner's petition, even if styled under § 2255, should be treated as a writ of coram nobis if the petitioner is no longer in custody and alleges fundamental errors of fact.
• Kaufman & Ruderman, Inc. v. Cohn & Rosenberger
  177 F.2d 849· 2d Cir.· 1949-11-02 ·cited 28×
  The court held that even if jurisdiction exists, a federal court may abuse its discretion by entertaining a declaratory judgment action that serves as a substitute for a lost right of removal.
• Acme Poultry Corp. v. United States
  146 F.2d 738· 4th Cir.· 1944-12-21 ·cited 28×
  The court held that a trial court has the power to increase or change a sentence during the same term it was imposed, provided no part of the fine has been paid or imprisonment begun, and that a corporation is bound by its attorney's actions.
• The State of Fla. ex rel. Antonia E. Sanchez v. Rhydon M. Call
  36 Fla. 305· Fla.· 1895-06-01 ·cited 28×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  Florida Supreme Court ordered a circuit judge to enter a corrected judgment in proper form after the Court had reversed an earlier judgment solely for defective form, holding that the judge's duty to enter the corrected judgment was ministerial rather than discretionary and there
• Webster v. Barnett
  17 Fla. 272· Fla.· 1879-06-01 ·cited 28×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Judgment
  Norman Webster appeals a judgment for $523.33 entered against him in a breach of promissory note action. The Florida Supreme Court reversed the judgment because the trial court improperly maintained a joint action against both the note's maker (Blew) and endorser (Webster), whose
• Corbitt v. State
  744 So. 2d 1130· Fla. 2d DCA· 1999-10-22 ·cited 27×
• Favis Clay Martin v. Estelle
  583 F.2d 1373· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-16 ·cited 27×·via Nunc Pro Tunc Determination
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to first determine if a meaningful retrospective competency hearing was practicable and by improperly placing the burden of proof on the state.
• Holland v. State
  634 So. 2d 813· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-04-07 ·cited 26×
  Joseph Holland was convicted of attempted first-degree murder, aggravated battery with a deadly weapon, display of a firearm during a felony, and kidnapping while armed. The appellate court reversed all convictions on two independent grounds: the trial court failed to conduct a p