JIMMY W. CARTER, 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.
Jimmy W. Carter appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to reduce or modify his sentence under Florida Rule 3.800(b). The appellate court treated the appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari and denied it, holding that although Carter filed the motion within the required sixty-day period, the trial court lost jurisdiction because it did not act on the motion within that same sixty-day window.
A trial court loses jurisdiction to act on a Rule 3.800(b) motion if the action does not occur within the sixty-day period following sentencing, even if the motion itself was timely filed. The trial court correctly concluded it lacked jurisdiction when it attempted to rule on Carter's motion four months after sentencing.
[1] An order denying a motion for reduction or modification of a legal sentence pursuant to Rule 3.800(b), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, is generally nonappealable.
[2] An appellate court may treat an improper appeal from a nonappealable order as a petition for writ of certiorari.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Even if a motion pursuant to Rule 3.800(b) is filed within the sixty day period prescribed therein, the trial court loses jurisdiction to act on the motion if such action does not also occur within that time period.”
Establishes the core holding that both filing and judicial action must occur within the sixty-day deadline
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarter pled nolo contendere to several counts of robbery, and the trial court imposed sentence on October 10, 1991. Carter filed a motion for reductio…
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 Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.800(B) cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Jimmy W. Carter has appealed from an order of the trial court denying his motion for reduction or modification of a legal sentence, pursuant to Rule 3.800(b), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. An order denying a motion pursuant to this rule is nonappealable. Alexander v. State, 553 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). However, we elect to treat the appeal as a petition for writ of certiorari, Dominguez v. State, 556 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), and deny it.
Carter pled nolo contendere to several counts of robbery and the trial court imposed sentence on October 10, 1991. Rule 3.800(b), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, permits a trial court to reduce a legal sentence imposed by it within sixty days of such imposition or, in this case, until December 9, 1991. On December 9, 1991, Carter filed the instant motion pursuant to Rule 3.800(b). On April 1, 1992, the trial court denied the motion, finding itself without jurisdiction to rule, given the passage of more than sixty days since entry of the judgments and sentences.
Even if a motion pursuant to Rule 3.800(b) is filed within the sixty day period prescribed therein, the trial court loses jurisdiction to act on the motion if such action does not also occur within that time period. State v. Mancil, 354 So. 2d 1258, 1259 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); Grosse v. State, 511 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987), rev. den. 519 So. 2d 987 (Fla.1988); Dominguez v. State, 556 So. 2d 499, 500 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). Therefore, although Carter filed the instant motion within the sixty day period, because the trial court did not act on the motion within that period, it correctly concluded that it no longer had jurisdiction to do so.1
The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.
JOANOS, C.J., and WIGGINTON and KAHN, JJ., concur. . We note that, in two cases where the trial court held a hearing on a Rule 3.800(b) motion within the sixty day period, but entered the order thereon after the expiration of that period, the courts held that the trial court "effectively enlarged the period of time in which [it] could enter the order modifying sentence.” See State v. Golden, 382 So. 2d 815, 816 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Smith v. State, 471 So. 2d 1347, 1348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). However, these cases are inapplicable herein, in that no hearing on Carter’s motion was ever held.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Skolar, 692 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…Certiorari GRANTED; Order QUASHED and REMANDED. HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur. . This is a nonappealable, nonfinal order which we elect to treat as a petition for certiorari because it violates the essential requirements of law. Carter v. State, 608 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); State v. Mendez, 423 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); State v. Wilcox, 351 So. 2d 89 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). See also State v. Barnes, 280 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973) (decided prior to Rule 3.190(j)). A district court of appeal can…
-
Anderson v. N. Fla. Prod. Credit Ass'n, 642 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…rror in Mlecka was held against the party who made it, the county. In the ease before us, the county, which indexed appellee’s mortgage under the improper name, is not a party to the suit. Nor do we find First American Title Insurance Co. v. Dixon, 608 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992), rev. denied, Dixon v. First American Title Insurance Co., 613 So. 2d 3 (Fla.1993), to be helpful to the position taken by appellants in the case before us. In that case, a title insurer brought an indemnity action against the cl…
-
Bennett v. State, 707 So. 2d 423 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)…[*424] PER CURIAM. This appeal is treated as a petition for writ of certiorari. Carter v. State, 608 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The petition is denied. BARFIELD, C.J., and ALLEN and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Smith v. State, 471 So. 2d 1347 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Grosse v. State, 511 So. 2d 688 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
- State v. Carlie Nolan Mancil, Jr., 354 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Alexander v. State, 553 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Melvin v. State, 553 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- State v. Golden, 382 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Dominguez v. State, 556 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)