JIMMY LAVERNE CANTY, 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 appellate court affirmed the judgment and sentence because the issues raised were either untimely filed or not preserved for appeal.
Appellant was adjudicated guilty of armed robbery and sentenced. He appealed the judgment and sentence, raising two issues regarding a denied motion 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 Fundamental Error Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
COBB, Judge.
Appellant Canty was adjudicated guilty of armed robbery in violation of section 812.13, Florida Statutes (1979) and sentenced to thirty years imprisonment with the trial court retaining jurisdiction over the first one-third of the sentence. It is this judgment and sentence that Canty has appealed.
First, Canty appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for new trial. The motion was not filed until after the notice of appeal was filed. Since the motion for new trial was untimely filed, the trial court was without jurisdiction to hear it. State v. Florida State Turnpike Authority, 134 So. 2d 12 (Fla.1961); State v. Farmer, 384 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
Second, Canty argues on appeal that the trial court erred in retaining jurisdiction over the first one-third of his sentence without stating the reasons on the record pursuant to section 947.16(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1979). This point was not raised before the trial court. It concerns a procedural error which is not fundamental; therefore, it cannot be raised for the first time on appeal. Jones v. State, 384 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 5th DCA), pet. for res. denied, 392 So. 2d 1375 (Fla.1980); Smith v. State, 378 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), approved, 394 So. 2d 407 (Fla.1980); Cf., Gonzalez v. State, 392 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981).
Accordingly, the judgment and sentence of appellant are affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
DAUKSCH, C. J., and SHARP, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Samuel S.J. Alexander v. State, 425 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…nd remand with directions that the court satisfy the individual particularity requirement of section 947.16(3)(a), Florida Statutes (1981). A court’s failure to satisfy this individual particularity requirement is a procedural error. Canty v. State, 402 So. 2d 1232 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Sawyer v. State, 401 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Appellant did not object when this error occurred. Hence, he cannot raise this issue on appeal. Canty; cf. Williams v. State, 414 So. 2d 509 (Fla.1982). In reviewing the sent…
-
State v. Anton, 700 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…Richardson v. State, 540 So. 2d 133 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Failure to file such a motion within the allotted time deprives the trial court of jurisdiction to rule on the motion. See Clifton v. State, 697 So. 2d 1000 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Canty v. State, 402 So. 2d 1232 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Anton filed his motion for new trial more than two months after the jury rendered its verdict. By granting a new trial, the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction. As a result, we reverse the trial court’s order granting Anton a…
-
Walcott v. State, 460 So. 2d 915 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984)…ake findings required by § 39.111(6), Fla.Stat.). Burley v. State, 402 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), cited Rubasky and Dunman and applied the COR to a sentencing error (failure to make findings required by § 39.111(6), Fla.Stat.). Canty v. State, 402 So. 2d 1232 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), cited Jones and Smith and applied the COR to a sentencing error (retention of jurisdiction over parole release without stating reasons on record as required by § 947.16(3)(a), Fla.Stat.). Greene v. State, 403 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 5…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gonzalez v. State, 392 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- Rice v. Cochran, 134 So. 2d 12 (Fla. 1961)
- Smith v. State, 378 So. 2d 313 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Jones v. State, 384 So. 2d 956 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Smith v. State, 394 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 1980)
- State v. Farmer, 384 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)