DON S. GAINES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The trial court denied as successive the appellant’s motion filed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a). Because the present motion was filed and ruled on while an appeal of one of the appellant’s previous Rule 3.800(a) motions, raising the same issue, was pending in this Court, the trial court did not have jurisdiction over the instant motion. See Bates v. State, 704 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). The trial court therefore should have dismissed the motion for lack of jurisdiction, rather than having denied the motion. See Williams v. State, 795 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Accordingly, we vacate the order denying the motion and remand for the trial court to dismiss the motion.
VACATED AND REMANDED.
ALLEN, C.J., and BENTON and PADOVANO, 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
- Bates v. State, 704 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Clark v. State, 795 So. 2d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)