CHARLES MARIE WITHAM
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 loses jurisdiction to enter a written order revoking probation once the appellate record has been transmitted to the appellate court, even if the revocation was orally pronounced before transmission.
[1] Upon transmission of the appellate record to the appellate court, the trial court loses jurisdiction to enter written orders, including ministerial orders to reduce oral…
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 trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter the order”
The court's explanation for why the probation revocation order could not be entered after record transmission.
Witham entered into a plea agreement resulting in conviction and sentence. The trial court orally pronounced probation revocation but did not enter a …
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 Appeal From Conviction And Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County; Charles A. Schwab, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562010CF0003756A.
Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Robert Porter, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kimberly T. Acuña, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
WARNER, J. We affirm the final judgment of conviction and sentence of appellant, based upon a plea agreement. We remand, however, to re-enter the written order revoking probation which was filed after the record on appeal was transferred to this court. As such, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter the order. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.600(a); cf., Escobar v. State, 189 So. 3d 1029, 1031 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016) (trial court has jurisdiction to reduce oral pronouncement to written order after notice of appeal is filed and until record on appeal is transmitted). Here, the court orally pronounced the revocation but did not enter a written order until after the record was transmitted by the clerk.1 In addition, it appears that duplicate
2
final judgments were entered. On remand, the court should also strike one of these judgments. Affirmed and remanded for entry of order revoking probation. CONNER and FORST, JJ., concur.
* * * Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
but this cuts off the trial court’s concurrent jurisdiction to enter ministerial orders. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.600(a).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Rivera v. State, 47 Fla. L. Weekly D445 (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)
-
Sandoval v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2022)
-
McCrae v. State (Fla. 4th DCA 2024)…econd District held the trial court erred in adjudicating the defendant a second time because the trial court had already adjudicated the defendant guilty of the underlying offense. Id. at 1149. The same result is dictated here. See Witham v. State, 311 So. 3d 34, 34 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (“[I]t appears that duplicate final judgments were entered. On remand, the [trial] court should also strike one of these judgments.”). We reverse and remand the case to the trial court to strike the second adjudication of gu…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Guelmer J. Escobar v. State, 189 So. 3d 1029 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)