TOMMY MARSHALL, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Tommy Marshall appeals the dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Having examined the petition, we agree with the trial court that it was properly treated as a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. At the time Marshall submitted his petition, a direct appeal from the same judgment and sentence was pending in this court. Therefore, the trial court correctly ruled that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. Harpham v. State, 415 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).
We affirm the dismissal of Marshall’s petition without prejudice to Marshall’s right to seek post-conviction relief once this court has disposed of his direct appeal.
LEHAN, A.C.J., and FRANK and SAND-ERLIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Allen v. State, 579 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)…is motion for postconviction relief. We affirm in part and reverse in part. The motion was denied because the trial court believed a direct appeal was pending and therefore that it had no jurisdiction to consider the motion. See Marshall v. State, 481 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). However, Allen had appealed directly from the denial of his pretrial motion for speedy trial discharge. This court treated the appeal as a petition for writ of prohibition on the authority of Sherrod v. Franza, 427 So. 2d 161 (Fl…
-
Curry v. State, 7 So. 3d 633 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…sentence were pending on appeal in this Court, it is also clear that the trial court intended that the ruling be without prejudice to Curry to timely pursue his post-conviction remedies at the conclusion of his direct appeal. See Marshall v. State, 481 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). We therefore affirm the order denying relief, as modified. Affirmed.…
-
Sanmartin v. State, 571 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)…n of property, which we have treated as the summary denial of a motion for postconviction relief. The trial court’s order is affirmed without prejudice to appellant seeking relief after his direct appeal [*7] has been decided. See Marshall v. State, 481 So. 2d 973 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986). RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.…
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
- Harpham v. State, 415 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- Hurst v. State, 415 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)