FREDERICK L. WATERFIELD JR., 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.
The court held that a postconviction court that erroneously transfers a motion instead of ruling on its merits must have that transfer order vacated and the motion decided.
[1] When venue has been transferred for trial and imposition of a sentence, the transferee court remains the court in which collateral postconviction matters are to be heard.
[2] A postconviction court errs by transferring a motion for postconviction relief to another county instead of ruling on its merits.
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 intelligenceDefendant filed a motion for post-conviction relief over twenty-three years after his conviction, alleging jurisdictional issues with the transfer of …
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 Collateral Matters cases and more on FLexlaw
In 1983 Frederick L. Waterfield Jr. was charged in Indian River County with several counts of murder and kidnapping. Reacting to pretrial publicity, the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit transferred some charges to the Fifth Judicial Circuit Court, Lake County. One homicide charge was transferred to the Twentieth Judicial Circuit, Charlotte County, where Waterfield was convicted of the lesser-included offense of manslaughter and sentenced to fifteen years in prison.
Over twenty-three years after his conviction and sentence were affirmed by this court, see Waterfield v. State, 491 So.2d 562 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986) (table decision), Waterfield filed a motion for post-conviction relief in the Charlotte County court, contending that the court never acquired jurisdiction over the murder prosecution because the Indian River County court’s transfer of his records was incomplete or improper. Rather than reviewing Waterfield’s motion, the postconviction court erroneously transferred it to the Indian River County court, reasoning its own jurisdiction was merely temporary because all of Waterfield’s files and records had been sent back to Indian River County. But when venue has been transferred for trial and imposition of a sentence, the transferee court remains the court in which collateral postconviction matters are to be heard. See State v. Overton, 970 So.2d 359 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Wasley v. State, 254 So.2d 243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971).
If the postconviction court had reviewed Waterfield’s motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, it would have found it both untimely and successive. See Waterfield v. State, 1 So.3d 235, 237-38 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). But because the postconviction court erroneously transferred Waterfield’s motion instead of considering it on the merits, we must reverse and remand. On remand, the postconviction court shall vacate the transfer order and enter an order disposing of Water-field’s motion on the merits.
*62Reversed and remanded with instructions.
DAVIS and WALLACE, JJ„ Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kyser v. State, 106 So. 3d 33 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…nty. Kyser argues that this was incorrect and that Escambia County is the proper forum to consider the postconviction motion. The state concedes the correctness of this position. See Hernandez v. State, 64 So. 3d 1175 (Fla.2011); Waterfield v. State 35 So. 3d 60 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010). Accordingly, we grant the petition. The Circuit Court for Bay County is directed to return the motion and, if necessary, the record or portions thereof to Escambia County for further proceedings. PETITION GRANTED. BENTON, C.J…
-
Stephens v. State, 279 So. 3d 835 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)…procedures used by the Polk and Alachua County clerks. See Mathis v. State, 419 So. 2d 774, 775 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) ("Any objection Mathis might have had to venue in Leon County was waived by his plea of guilty."). Further, in Waterfield v. State, 35 So. 3d 60, 61 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010), this court held that it was improper for the Charlotte County court to transfer a postconviction motion to Indian River County based on a similar argument. There, the case was originally transferred from Indian River County…
Authorities Cited
- Wasley v. State, 254 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- State v. Overton, 970 So. 2d 359 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
- Waterfield v. State, 1 So. 3d 235 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)