N.E.B., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
N.E.B., APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
806 So. 2d 575
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2002)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal filed pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). We affirm the dispositions but vacate the disposition order and remand with instructions to enter separate disposition orders for each offense. See K.L.P. v. State, 783 So. 2d 336, 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“This Court has repeatedly stated that a separate order of adjudication and disposition must be entered for each juvenile offense.”).
ALLEN, C.J., MINER and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davis v. State, 20 So. 3d 1024 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…sue or if the two motions are “sufficiently related to divest the trial court of jurisdiction.” Lovett v. State, 851 So. 2d 851, 852-53 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (quoting Parrish v. State, 816 So. 2d 146, 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)); see also Gaines v. State, 806 So. 2d 575, 575 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Conversely, a trial court may rule on the merits of a subsequent rule 3.800(a) motion if it raises issues that are not related to the earlier motion. Lovett, 851 So. 2d at 852. [*1026] Latulip v. State, 884 So. 2d 254, 255…
-
Latulip v. State, 884 So. 2d 254 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…sue or if the two motions are “sufficiently related to divest the trial court of jurisdiction.” Lovett v. State, 851 So. 2d 851, 852-53 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (quoting Parrish v. State, 816 So. 2d 146, 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)); see also Gaines v. State, 806 So. 2d 575, 575 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Conversely, a trial court may rule on the merits of a subsequent rule 3.800(a) motion if it raises issues that are not related to the earlier motion. Lovett, 851 So. 2d at 852. In 2D03-4718, LaTulip sought prison credit a…
-
Lovett v. State, 851 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…nce which is the subject of a pending appeal has raised the same issue or if the two motions are [*853] “sufficiently related to divest the trial court of jurisdiction.” Parrish v. State, 816 So. 2d 146, 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); see Gaines v. State, 806 So. 2d 575, 575 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). In the present case, the issues raised in the second motion to correct illegal sentence, which was the subject of a then pending appeal, were not the same and were not sufficiently related to those presented in the third m…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- K.L.P. v. State, 783 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Roberts v. State, 783 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)