ERIC WALLEN, 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.
Trial court lacked jurisdiction to resentence defendant before appellate mandate issued, so the resentencing was reversed and case remanded.
A trial court is without jurisdiction to resentence a defendant before an appellate court's mandate has issued.
[1] A trial court lacks jurisdiction to resentence a defendant before an appellate court's mandate has issued, even if the trial court acts promptly.
Previewing 1 of 1 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 judgment of an appellate court becomes final upon issuance of a mandate.”
Court explaining the jurisdictional principle that prevents trial court action before appellate mandate issues.
Wallen had entered a plea agreement for a fifteen-year sentence for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, but the appellate court found the sentenc…
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 Jurisdiction Of Trial Court cases and more on FLexlaw
SAWAYA, J.
This appeal originates from the decision issued by this court in Wallen v. State, 877 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004), wherein we held that although Wallen had entered into a plea agreement to serve a fifteen-year sentence for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, the sentence was illegal. Id. at 738. We vacated the sentence and remanded the ease to allow the State to either agree to a legal sentence or withdraw from the plea agreement and proceed to trial. However, before the mandate issued from this court the trial court resentenced Wallen.
While we acknowledge the attempts of the trial judge to promptly resolve this matter, it is obvious that he acted with too much haste. “The judgment of an appellate court becomes final upon issuance of a mandate.” Washington v. State, 637 So. 2d 296, 297 (Fla. 1st DCA) (citation omitted), review denied, 645 So. 2d 456 (Fla.1994). Similar to the proceedings in the instant case, in Washington the defendant was resentenced before the mandate had issued from the appellate court. Because the trial court was without jurisdiction to resentence the defendant, the sentence was reversed and the ease remanded for resentencing. Id. at 297. Like the court in Washington, we reverse Wallen’s sentence and remand for resentencing. We note parenthetically that the State concedes the error. REVERSED AND REMANDED.
THOMPSON and PLEUS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Errol D. Brooks v. State, 937 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…, 768 So. 2d 513 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). We note, and the State concedes, that the trial court resentenced Brooks prior to the issuance of our mandate in Brooks. As a result, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to resentence Brooks. See Wallen v. State, 909 So. 2d 520, 520-21 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005). We also note that our instructions in Brooks were not completely accurate. Therefore, on remand, Brooks is entitled to be resentenced in accordance with the sentencing guidelines applicable to his conviction, but the S…
Authorities Cited
- Wallen v. State, 877 So. 2d 737 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Washington v. State, 637 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)