TIMOTHY SHORT, 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.
Timothy Short was convicted of battery in Circuit Court after the State reduced its charges from a felony to misdemeanors. The appellate court quashed the judgment because the Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to try a misdemeanor case absent an associated felony, rendering the judgment a nullity.
The Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to try the misdemeanor case and enter judgment because the Circuit Court has no jurisdiction to try misdemeanors absent an associated felony. The judgment is therefore a nullity and must be quashed.
[1] A circuit court lacks jurisdiction to try a misdemeanor charge when the associated felony charge has been nolle prosequied.
[2] A judgment entered by a court lacking jurisdiction is a nullity.
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“Because the Circuit Court has no jurisdiction to try misdemeanors in the absence of a felony, the judgment itself is a nullity.”
Establishes the core holding regarding lack of subject matter jurisdiction
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceShort was initially charged with robbery and simple battery in Circuit Court. Before trial, the State announced it could not proceed with the felony b…
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 County Court Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
HARRIS, J.
Because the record reflects that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider the issue below, we quash the judgment on appeal. We find that the judgment below was entered without jurisdiction and is a nullity.
Short was charged in the Circuit Court with robbery and simple battery. Because the court had jurisdiction of the felony, it also had jurisdiction of the associated misdemeanor. But prior to trial, the State announced that it could not go forward with the felony but wished to proceed with simple battery and petit theft.
The defense argued that it would be different charges from those in the charging document which would constitute an amended information. The judge held it would not constitute an amended information; the State would merely be going to trial on the lesser included charge to robbery, petit theft, and the associated battery.
The defense again insisted that if the case went to trial on only misdemeanors, then jurisdiction was in County Court. The judge replied:
That is true. The only thing I have jurisdiction to try is the battery, since the county judge and the circuit judge are just sitting in each other’s courts ... Let’s try the battery, then. Let’s get our jurors on the way. You each have six challenges.
The jury returned a verdict of guilty of battery and the judge, as a judge of the Circuit Court, entered judgment. Because the Circuit Court has no jurisdiction to try misdemeanors in the absence of a felony, the judgment itself is a nullity.
The discussion between the court and cóunsel set out above indicates that the judge may have been proceeding in his capacity as a temporarily assigned county judge. But while a cross-assigned circuit judge may sit as a county court and try issues properly before the county court, he may not try those issues in the capacity of a circuit court regardless of the cross-assignment. The jurisdiction of the various courts cannot be changed by the assignment of judges.
Perhaps the Judgment reflecting that it was entered by the Circuit Court was merely a clerical error and the Clerk of Court should have reflected the County Court instead. If so, this appeal should have been taken to the Circuit Court and not here.
Since the judgment on appeal is a nullity, we quash the judgment and remand.
JUDGMENT QUASHED and CAUSE REMANDED with directions to vacate the judgment.
W. SHARP, J., and ORFINGER, M., Senior Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pinkard v. State, 852 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…information in the county court because a simple battery is a lesser included offense of a third-degree felony battery did not breathe life into the original information, nor did this transfer the action back to the county court. In Short v. State, 767 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000), both felony and misdemeanor charges had been filed in the circuit court. The state announced at the beginning of trial that it was proceeding only on the misdemeanor charges. Defense counsel objected on the grounds that the circ…