LLOYD KEVIN HULICK, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Lloyd Hulick appeals the trial court’s dismissal, on jurisdictional grounds, of his motion for post conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. At the time Mr. Hulick filed his motion, he had pending before this court an appeal from an earlier denial of a similar motion. Thus, the trial court was correct in dismissing Mr. Huliek’s latest motion. Ruth v. State, 635 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Accordingly, as in Ruth, we affirm the trial court’s order without prejudice to Mr. Hulick’s refiling the motion after jurisdiction again vests in the trial court.
Affirmed.
DANAHY, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Searcy v. State, 971 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…rocedure 3.850. We affirm the trial court’s denial of the 3.800(b) motion without prejudice to the defendant to re-file his motion after jurisdiction again vests in the trial court. Tompkins v. State, 894 So. 2d 857, 859 (Fla.2005); Hulick v. State, 644 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). The defendant also argues that the trial court erred by holding him in direct criminal contempt without affording him the opportunity to present evidence, in violation of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The following c…
-
Washington v. State, 823 So. 2d 248 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)…ferent grounds. See also Lee v. State, 392 So. 2d 913 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)(trial court had no jurisdiction to rule on second 3.850 motion where an order denying a prior 3.850 motion seeking relief on different grounds was on appeal); Hulick v. State, 644 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). The proposition that an appeal of an order denying a rule 3.850 motion prevents the trial court from ruling on a second 3.850 motion is based on the principle that a trial court has no power to rule on an issue which would inter…
-
Bryant v. State, 102 So. 3d 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…ses: Ruth, 635 So. 2d 1061; Ross, 598 So. 2d 149; Rodriquez, 592 So. 2d 1261; Braxton, 568 So. 2d 1003; and Davis, 491 So. 2d 1232. In addition, we distinguish our holdings in Bessette v. State, 709 So. 2d 649 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998) and Hulick v. State, 644 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). Finally, we certify conflict with the decisions of the First, Third, and Fourth Districts in Lee, 392 So. 2d 913; Gobie, 188 So. 2d 34; and Wells, 362 So. 2d 441.6 III. Coordinating Concurrent Jurisdiction in Postconviction Proc…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ruth v. State, 635 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)