LUCIE MAE THOMAS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court lacks jurisdiction to enter a restitution order while a defendant's direct appeal is pending.
[1] A trial court is divested of jurisdiction to enter a restitution order while a defendant's direct appeal is pending.
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 intelligenceLucie Mae Thomas appealed the postconviction court's denial of her Rule 3.800(a) motion to correct an illegal sentence. The postconviction court had r…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.800(A) Motion To Correct Illegal Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
LUCIE MAE THOMAS,
Appellant,
v. Case No. 5D19-804
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Appellee.
________________________________/
Opinion filed January 10, 2020
3.800 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County, Leticia J. Marques, Judge.
Lucie Mae Thomas, Quincy, pro se.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals the order summarily denying her Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(a) Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence. In denying Appellant’s motion, the postconviction court relied on Graham v. State, 160 So. 3d 108, 109 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). Unlike in Graham, the trial court in this case lacked jurisdiction to enter a restitution order while Appellant’s direct appeal was pending. See Messina v. State, 160 So. 3d
2 523, 523 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015); Butler v. State, 951 So. 2d 38, 39-40 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). Accordingly, we reverse the order under review and remand this case to the trial court to conduct a new restitution hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
EISNAUGLE, SASSO and TRAVER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sanford Paul Butler v. State, 951 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007)
- Calderon v. State, 160 So. 3d 108 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)