DAVOWN DRAYTON
v.
THE 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.
Davown Drayton appeals a trial court order dismissing his post-conviction ineffective assistance of counsel motion for lack of jurisdiction. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal because Drayton's direct appeal was pending at the time, depriving the trial court of jurisdiction to hear the post-conviction motion.
The trial court lacked jurisdiction to rule on the post-conviction motion because Drayton's direct appeal was pending before the appellate court at the time the motion was filed. Trial courts are without jurisdiction to adjudicate post-conviction motions while direct appeals are pending.
“the trial court was without jurisdiction to adjudicate Drayton's post-conviction motion”
Establishes the court's holding on the jurisdictional issue
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDrayton, acting pro se, filed a post-conviction motion asserting ineffective assistance of counsel in the trial court on January 12, 2024. At that tim…
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 Lack Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM. Appellant Davown Drayton, the defendant below, appeals the trial court’s January 12, 2024 order dismissing, for lack of jurisdiction, Drayton’s
self-represented post-conviction motion asserting ineffective assistance of counsel.
We affirm the trial court’s January 12, 2024 dismissal order because Drayton’s plenary appeal of his conviction was then pending in this Court (Case No. 3D23-0452) (“Drayton I”).
Hence, the trial court was without jurisdiction to adjudicate Drayton’s post-conviction motion. See Sandoval v. State, 932 So. 2d 1147, 1148 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006) (holding that a trial court lacks jurisdiction to rule on a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion while the defendant’s direct appeal is pending before the appellate court).
On January 29, 2024, though, Drayton’s appellate counsel in Drayton I voluntarily dismissed the Drayton I appeal. We, therefore, express no opinion regarding Drayton’s post-conviction motion and our affirmance of the trial court’s January 12, 2024 dismissal order is without prejudice to Drayton timely filing below a cognizable post-conviction motion.
Affirmed.