STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
KENNETH BROWN, 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 State appealed a trial court's order granting Kenneth Brown's motion to suppress evidence. The appellate court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the State filed its notice of appeal 19 days after the order was rendered, exceeding the 15-day filing requirement under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c)(2).
The appellate court lacked jurisdiction because the State failed to file its notice of appeal within the mandatory 15-day period following the January 22, 1993 order. The subsequent March 25, 1993 order could not extend the deadline because it contained no substantive changes and resolved no ambiguity in the original order.
[1] An appellate court lacks jurisdiction over an appeal if the notice of appeal is not filed within the time prescribed by the rules of appellate procedure.
[2] A trial court's order granting a motion to suppress is rendered when it is signed by the judge and filed with the clerk.
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“the state had [15] fifteen days from January 22, 1993, in which to file its notice of appeal. Accordingly, the state's February 10, 1993, notice of appeal was not timely filed as is required to confer jurisdiction on this court.”
Establishes the mandatory 15-day filing requirement and that the State's notice was untimely, depriving the court of jurisdiction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn January 22, 1993, the trial court signed and filed a form order granting Brown's motion to suppress and ordering Brown's release. The State filed i…
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 Notice Of Appeal Filing Deadline cases and more on FLexlaw
DIAMANTIS, Judge.
This is an appeal by the state from the trial court’s order granting appellee Kenneth Brown’s motion to suppress.1 We must dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the state failed to file its notice of appeal within 15 days of rendition of the trial court’s order as required by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c)(2).
On January 22, 1993, the trial court signed a form entitled “Court Minutes” and “Order (Motion Hearing)” which granted Brown’s motion to suppress and ordered Brown released as to the present case only. The trial court X’d the blanks preceding both the words “Court Minutes” and the words “Order (Motion Hearing)”, indicating that the subject form was both the court minutes and an order, of the court. The minutes/order was signed by the trial court and filed with the clerk in open court on January 22, 1993. Thus, the order was rendered on January 22, 1993. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g). The state filed its notice of appeal on February 10, 1993, some 19 days after entry of the court’s order. Subsequently, on March 25,1993, the trial court entered a second order granting defendant’s motion to suppress. This order was filed with the clerk on March 25, 1993, and, thus, was rendered on that day. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g).
In Hamson v. State, 573 So. 2d 60, 61 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), we held that a form court minutes/order did not confer jurisdiction on this court “because it [was] signed by the court clerk and not the judge.” In the present case, however, the trial judge signed the form minutes/order of January 22, 1993, which was also filed on that date with the clerk. Under rule 9.140(c)(2), the state had fifteen days from January 22, 1993, in which to file its notice of appeal. Accordingly, the state’s February 10, 1993, notice of appeal was not timely filed as is required to confer jurisdiction on this court.
The state argues that we have jurisdiction because it is appealing the March 25, 1993, order which again granted Brown’s motion to suppress and because the February 10, 1993, notice of appeal is premature but timely under the authority of Williams v. State, 324 So. 2d 74 (Fla.1975). We reject this argument because the subsequent March 25, 1993, order neither contains any substantive changes nor resolves any genuine ambiguity in the January 22, 1993, order; thus, the subsequent order of March 25, 1993, cannot delay the time for seeking review. Daytona Migi Corp. v. Daytona Automotive Fiberglass, Inc., 417 So. 2d 272, 273 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). See also St. Moritz Hotel v. Daughtry, 249 So. 2d 27, 28 (Fla.1971); B.G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 372 So. 2d 184, 185 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).
APPEAL DISMISSED.
COBB and W. SHARP, JJ., concur. . See Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(c)(1)(B).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Wagner, 863 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2004)…(7th ed.1999)). . Although the issue before us in Employers’ Fire dealt expressly with "judgments/’ we noted that "[b]oth parties argue from decisions fixing the time for commencement of an appeal.” Id. at 179-80. . For example, in State v. Brown, 629 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993), the Fifth District held that a "court minutes/order” form, signed by the judge and filed with the court clerk, constituted a rendered order. As opposed to the court minutes form at issue here, and the court status form at issue…
-
Dep't OF Corr. v. Bergman, 890 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…for inadvertent rendition. For example, a judge may sign a court minutes form and file it with the clerk unbeknownst to the parties. An area of confusion may arise where a “court minutes/order” form signed by a judge is utilized. See State v. Brown, 629 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). The Department interprets footnote 7 in Wagner as approving the use of a joint “court minutes/order” form, such as used in Brown and in this ease, as distinguished from the minutes form in [*282] Wagner, which did not specifical…
-
State v. Wagner, 825 So. 2d 453 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…“order” authorizing Wagner’s release, if it was an order, was rendered on January 23, 2002.1 We have previously held that court minutes signed by a judge are, in some circumstances, sufficient to constitute an appealable order. See State v. Brown, 629 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993). In doing so, we distinguished minutes signed by a judge from minutes signed only by the clerk, concluding that the latter did not constitute an order without a judge’s signature. See Harrison v. State, 573 So. 2d 60, 61 (Fla. 5t…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 324 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1975)
- ST. Moritz Hotel v. Jimmy C. Daughtry & the Fla. Indus. Comm'n, 249 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1971)
- Daytona Migi Corp. v. Daytona Auto. Fiberglass Inc., 417 So. 2d 272 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982)
- B. G. Leasing, Inc. v. Heider, 372 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Harrison v. State, 573 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)