ELLIOT COURTNEY MCKNIGHT, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
The court held that the order denying the motion to withdraw a plea is affirmed because the motion was untimely filed.
Appellant filed a pro se motion to withdraw his plea after sentencing. The motion was initially filed with the appellate court and then transferred to…
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 Waiver Of Appellate Review cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a trial court order denying the appellant’s pro se post-sentencing motion to withdraw his plea. The motion was initially, and erroneously, filed with this Court on January 4, 2007. The motion was then transferred to the circuit court for consideration and disposition. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.040(b)(1).
The circuit court denied the motion for lack of jurisdiction and lack of the sentencing transcript, apparently believing that the erroneous filing with this Court had deprived the circuit court of jurisdiction. The appellant then filed a pro se notice of appeal from that order. The record affirmatively shows that the appellant’s motion was untimely. Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.170(Z). Rendition of sentence occurred on November 21, 2006, and the motion to withdraw plea was not provided to the South Florida Reception Center for mailing until December 29, 2006.
We therefore affirm the order below as the motion was untimely. “Failure to file a motion to withdraw the plea within 30 days waives the issue for appellate review, and the defendant is limited to filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.” Gafford v. State, 783 So. 2d 1191, 1192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Griffin v. State, 114 So. 3d 890 (Fla. 2013)…e to file a motion to withdraw the plea within thirty days waives the issue for appellate review, and the defendant is limited to filing a motion pursuant to applicable Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 or 3.851. See, e.g., McKnight v. State, 964 So. 2d 803, 804 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Dayton v. State, 867 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Weidner v. State, 767 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). Therefore, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Griffin’s rule 3.170(0 motion…
-
Daniels v. State, 974 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008)…hdraw his plea nine months after entering a guilty plea. Daniels claimed his counsel coerced and misadvised him into taking the plea. The record shows that his motion was untimely under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(i). McKnight v. State, 964 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007). Therefore, we affirm, but our affirmance is without prejudice to Daniels filing a sworn motion for post-conviction relief in conformance with Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Douze v. State, 945 So. 2d 653 (Fla. 4th DC…
-
Davee Feazell v. State, 115 So. 3d 1045 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)…ever had jurisdiction to rule on the merits of the motion. Bermudez v. State, 901 So. 2d 981, 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005); see also Golden v. State, 84 So. 3d 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); James v. State, 12 So. 3d 1290 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009); McKnight v. State, 964 So. 2d 803, 804 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Dayton v. State, 867 So. 2d 647 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). On remand, the order denying appellant’s motion shall be modified to reflect denial was due to lack of jurisdiction. Affirmed and remanded with directions. WARNER,…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gafford v. State, 783 So. 2d 1191 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)