JULIE LYNNE FULLER, 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.
Julie Fuller appeals her convictions for conspiracy to commit organized fraud and related crimes. The appellate court affirmed her guilty plea and time-served sentence but reversed the restitution orders because the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter them after Fuller filed her notice of appeal.
The trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter the restitution orders because they were signed and rendered after the defendant filed her notice of appeal, making the orders void.
[1] A trial court loses jurisdiction to enter orders regarding restitution after a defendant files a notice of appeal.
[2] Restitution orders rendered after a notice of appeal has been filed are void for lack of jurisdiction.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter the restitution order or the corrected restitution order because they were rendered after Fuller had filed her notice of appeal”
Establishes the central legal basis for reversing the restitution orders
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFuller pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement that provided for a nolle prosequi of an organized fraud charge and a time-served sentence on three…
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 Anders V. California Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
PATTERSON, Chief Judge.
Julie Fuller appeals from her judgment and sentence for conspiracy to commit organized fraud, false application for a driver’s license, and unauthorized possession of a driver’s license. Fuller’s appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We affirm the judgment and sentence without discussion, but we reverse the restitution order and corrected restitution order and remand for further proceedings.
Pursuant to a plea agreement, Fuller pleaded guilty in exchange for a nolle pro-sequi of an organized fraud charge and for a time-served sentence on the remaining three charges. The plea agreement provided that restitution was to be capped at $11,076.72. Our independent review of the record reveals that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter the restitution order or the corrected restitution order because they were rendered after Fuller had filed her notice of appeal. See K.D. v. State, 779 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Edwards v. State, 734 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).
In the judgment rendered on December 14, 1999, the space is checked that states, “RESTITUTION IN ACCORDANCE WITH ATTACHED ORDER.” The trial court, however, did not sign the original restitution order until January 25, 2000, and it was not rendered until February 11, 2000, well after Fuller filed her notice of appeal on December 31, 1999.
Therefore, we strike the restitution orders and remand for the trial court to enter a new restitution order. Affirmed in part, restitution orders stricken, and remanded.
NORTHCUTT, J., and DANAHY, PAUL W., (Senior) Judge, Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Awilda Rodriguez v. State, 964 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)…s presented, but the court ordered restitution in the amount of the deputy’s insurer’s claim. As Mrs. Rodriguez maintained, the circuit court lost jurisdiction to enter the restitution order when she filed her notice of appeal. See Fuller v. State, 786 So. 2d 1269, 1269 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); see also Marro v. State, 803 So. 2d 906, 907 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002). Accordingly, we reverse the order. Generally, when we strike an order of restitution the trial court may hold a new hearing on remand to determine the prope…
-
Smith v. State, 39 So. 3d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…rder in connection with this hearing. Our independent review of the record reveals that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter the restitution order because it was rendered months after Smith filed his notice of appeal. Fuller v. State, 786 So. 2d 1269, 1269 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (in an Anders appeal, holding that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter two restitution orders because the orders “were rendered after [the defendant] had filed her notice of appeal”); Frazier v. State, 748 So. 2d 11…
-
Lebert F. Batten v. State, 895 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)…urged us to reverse a restitution order entered against him because the order was entered after he filed his notice of appeal to this court, thereby divesting the trial court of jurisdiction. The State properly cen-cedes error. See Fuller v. State, 786 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Edwards v. State, 734 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). In the light of our disposition of this case, the restitution order must be vacated in any event.…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- K.D. v. State, 779 So. 2d 468 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- Hamilton v. State, 734 So. 2d 1130 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)