JOE L. HAWKINS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1991-05-10
No. 89-01888
SCHOONOVER, C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.
579 So. 2d 334 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1991) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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.


Holding

The court held that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to try the misdemeanor charge after the felony charge was dismissed.


Facts & Procedural History

Hawkins was charged with a felony and a misdemeanor, vesting jurisdiction in the circuit court. The circuit court granted Hawkins' motion to dismiss t…

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.


Opinion of the Court
RYDER, Judge.

RYDER, Judge.

Appellant, Joe L. Hawkins (Hawkins), challenges the judgment adjudicating him guilty of possession of drug paraphernalia. Hawkins raises three issues, and our determination that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to try the ease renders the other two issues moot.

The information originally charged Hawkins with a felony (possession of cocaine) and a misdemeanor (possession of drug paraphernalia), which vested jurisdiction in the circuit court. Thereafter, the court granted Hawkins’ motion to dismiss the felony count. At this point, the circuit court no longer had jurisdiction over the misdemeanor count. See Woods v. State, 556 So. 2d 493 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (state formally enters a nolle prosequi on the felony count, thereby divesting the circuit court of jurisdiction over the remaining misdemeanor charge). Cf. State v. Vazquez, 450 So. 2d 203 (Fla.1984) (circuit court did not lose jurisdiction over misdemeanor charge when state failed to prosecute felony charge, because the felony charge was never formally dropped).

The facts in the instant case are controlled by Woods, because this case was not one in which the state decided at trial not to proceed on the felony charge. The felony count was formally dismissed by the court, when the court granted Hawkins’ motion to dismiss. The state contends that the case was heard by a county court judge, not a circuit judge; and therefore, should not be reversed. The state bases this argument on the fact that Circuit Judge Mills, sua sponte, declared himself a county court judge for that day. However, Judge Mills did not have the authority to confer this status upon himself, as he was not the chief judge. See Fla.R.Jud.Admin. 2.050(b)(4). Accordingly, Hawkins’ conviction and sentence are reversed.

SCHOONOVER, C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Andujar-Ruiz v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2021)
    …ances as a felony which is also charged." When the circuit court dismissed the battery charge, Mr. Andujar-Ruiz no longer faced a felony charge. Consequently, the circuit court could not adjudicate the unrelated misdemeanors. See Hawkins v. State, 579 So. 2d 334, 335 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (holding that when "the court granted Hawkins' motion to dismiss the felony count . . . . the circuit court no longer had jurisdiction over the misdemeanor count"); see also Oglesby v. State, 911 So. 2d 1288, 1288 (Fla. 1st D…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw