STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
CAROL J. YAROS, 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 the dismissal of a felony charge for leaving the scene of an accident with injuries. The court held that a county court's prior judgment entering a felony plea was absolutely void due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and therefore the State could properly reinstate the felony charge in circuit court.
A county court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over felonies, so any judgment it enters adjudicating a felony is absolutely null and void. Estoppel does not apply because subject matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by consent or the failure to object. Therefore, the State may properly reinstate the felony charge in circuit court.
[1] A county court lacks jurisdiction over felony offenses, rendering any judgment or sentence entered by it concerning a felony void.
[2] Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred upon a court by consent, waiver, or estoppel.
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“jurisdiction of the subject matter cannot be conferred by consent or failure to object”
Establishes the fundamental principle that estoppel cannot be used to confer subject matter jurisdiction on a court
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarol Yaros was initially cited for leaving the scene of an accident. She pleaded to the felony charge in county court, paid a fine, and completed dri…
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 Felony Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
WHATLEY, Judge.
The State appeals the order dismissing the information charging Carol Yaros with the felony of leaving the scene of an accident with injuries in violation of section 316.021(1), Florida Statutes (1997). We reverse.
Yaros filed a motion to dismiss the information on double jeopardy grounds. She alleged that she had previously pleaded to the offense in county court, paid her fine, and completed the sanction of attending driving school. At the hearing on the motion, no satisfactory explanation was given for how Yaros had been able to plead to the felony of leaving the scene with injuries in county court. The trial court granted the motion on due process grounds because it did not believe double jeopardy would apply to an offense over which a court had no jurisdiction.
In this appeal, the State argues that because the county court does not have jurisdiction over felonies, any judgment or sentence entered by that court pertaining to a felony is void. Yaros argues that the State is estopped from filing an information against her in circuit court because she relied on the representations of two state agents when she entered her plea in county court: the police officer who issued her the citation which directed her to set a hearing in traffic court and the prosecutor who went along with the proceedings in county court.
The doctrine of estoppel does not apply to this case because “jurisdiction of the subject matter cannot be conferred by consent or failure to object....” Winn & Lovett Grocery Co. v. Luke, 156 Fla. 638, 24 So. 2d 310, 312 (1946). Accord FCCI Mutual Ins. v. Cayce’s Excavation, 675 So. 2d 1028, 1029 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (“It is well settled that subject matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by estoppel.”); see also Clayton v. Willis, 489 So. 2d 813, 815 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986) (misdemeanor jurisdiction cannot be conferred on circuit court by waiver or consent); State v. Coble, 704 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (once felony charge resolved, circuit court no longer had jurisdiction over misdemeanor even though it arose out of same circumstances as felony). Thus, the State’s silence at the county court proceedings did not and could not operate to confer jurisdiction on the county court to adjudicate the felony charge against Yaros. Furthermore, it appears that Yaros was not unaware that the charge against her was a felony because she, through the same attorney who represented her in county court, filed a document entitled “Notice of Appearance, Waiver of Arraignment, Entry of Plea, and Request for Jury Trial” in the circuit court thirteen days before appearing in county court.
“When a court lacks subject matter jurisdiction it has no power to decide the case and any judgment entered is absolutely null and void, can be set aside and stricken from the record on motion at any time and may be collaterally attacked.” Young v. State, 439 So. 2d 306, 308 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
Accordingly, we reverse the order of dismissal and remand with directions that the information be reinstated.
Reversed and remanded.
PATTERSON, A.C.J., and BLUE, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ingraham v. State, 122 So. 3d 934 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…uring a traffic stop in 2011. And the fact that Ingraham acquiesced to the circuit court’s jurisdiction is irrelevant as subject matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by agreement or failure to object. See Hicks, 990 So. 2d at 685; State v. Yaros, 728 So. 2d 1201, 1202 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); White v. State, 568 So. 2d 1318, 1319 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). Accordingly, the misdemeanor convictions and sentences are void, and we reverse the misdemeanor convictions and sentences and remand for further proceedings in the…
-
Waggy v. State, 935 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…ecide the case and any judgment entered is absolutely null and void, can be set aside and stricken from the record on motion at any time, and may be collaterally attacked.” See Young v. State, 439 So. 2d 306, 308 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983); State v. Yaros, 728 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). The appellant has made a facially sufficient claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for his counsel’s failure to further investigate the lack of subject matter jurisdiction where he states that his counsel was aware of the i…
-
McMANAMA v. State, 816 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…aring on that motion, the circuit court was persuaded by the State’s argument that the adjudication entered by the county court had been void and, as such, the State could proceed on the felony charge based on this court’s opinion in State v. Yaros, 728 So. 2d 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). The circuit court denied Mr. McManama’s motion to dismiss and he pleaded no contest to the felony charge which is the subject of this appeal. Mr. McManama reserved the right to appeal the issue concerning whether double jeopardy…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Winn & Lovett Grocery Co. v. Luke, 156 Fla. 638 (Fla. 1945)
- State v. Coble, 704 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- Puzzo v. State, 439 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Young v. State, 439 So. 2d 306 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Fcci Mut. Ins. Co. v. Cayce's Excavation, Inc., 675 So. 2d 1028 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Wiley G. Clayton v. Honorable Ben C. Willis, 489 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986)