FRANKLIN MONFISTON, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
FRANKLIN MONFISTON, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
69 So. 3d 977
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2011)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
Affirmed. See Anthony v. State, 980 So.2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), rev. denied, 6 So.3d 607 (Fla.2009). Appellant argues the second claim of his postconviction motion which this court did not discuss in its remand in Monfiston v. State, 946 So.2d 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). This court affirmed the summary denial of that claim in the prior appeal.
GROSS, CIKLIN and CONNER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Crick v. Robbin Vickery Crick, 78 So. 3d 696 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)…court’s award of alimony. Moreover, in combination, the court-ordered monthly outlay for alimony, child support, and debt service is in excess of the former husband’s net monthly income and constitutes an abuse of discretion. See Cooper v. Cooper, 69 So. 3d 977, 981 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). Although the magis [*699] trate did not make a net income finding for the former husband, even using the gross monthly income finding of $6666.67, the alimony award of $2000 per month for twenty-four months coupled with the…
-
Horowitz v. Horowitz, 139 So. 3d 929 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…dify the support awards prospectively; and, therefore, the modification proceedings will not interfere with the subject matter of the pending appeal. For support, he cites to Joseph v. Joseph, 881 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004), and Cooper v. Cooper, 69 So. 3d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011). Analysis Harmonizing the cases, we conclude that the trial court may consider the modification petition incident to its jurisdiction under Rule 9.600(c); however, it may not enter a final judgment disposing of that petition unt…
-
Smith v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 148 So. 3d 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…for further proceedings after disposition of the non-final appeal. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.130(f) (providing that the lower tribunal may not enter a final order disposing of the cause while an appeal of a non-final order is pending); Cooper v. Cooper, 69 So. 3d 977 (Fla. 2d DCA 2011) (holding that trial court’s purported final order was a nullity by operation of law where the order was entered while appeal of earlier non-final order was pending). WOLF, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Anthony v. State, 980 So. 2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- Monfiston v. State, 946 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)