WALTER FRANK KNOWLES, 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.
Appellant Knowles filed a pro se notice of appeal in a criminal case that did not comply with Florida Appellate Rules. The court dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction, holding that a defective notice of appeal fails to vest appellate jurisdiction regardless of the substance of the underlying claims.
The court held that the notice of appeal was deficient and did not constitute proper filing under the Florida Appellate Rules. The court granted the State's motion to dismiss because the timely and proper filing of a notice of appeal in the manner prescribed is a jurisdictional essential, and failure to comply deprives the appellate court of jurisdiction.
“Appellate jurisdiction of the subject matter and of the parties is acquired by the filing of a notice of appeal in the form and within the time required.”
Establishes the foundational rule that proper notice of appeal filing is jurisdictional
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKnowles was a criminal defendant who had been represented by counsel (Public Defender T. Edward Austin, Jr.) at trial on December 10-11, 1963. After t…
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 Substantial Compliance With Rules cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellee, State of Florida, moves to dis-aniss this appeal upon the grounds that the following form of notice of appeal filed by appellant in his own proper person is insufficient:
“Clerk of Criminal Court in and for Duval County, State of Florida.
- Respondent -
Walter Frank Knowles P.O.Box 221 — R.D.C.C. Unit #4 Raiford, Florida - Petitioner -
NOTICE OF APPEAL
Comes now Walter Frank Knowles defendant, in proper person. Serves notice upon this Honorable Court, that he desires and seeks to be granted a new trial.
Said defendant was represented in court by counsel, said Honorable T. Edward Austin, Jr., Public Defender in and for Duval County, State of Florida. Trial date, December 10-11,1963.
Said defendant was to understand that appeal had been entered, but defendant has in no way been so notified.
Respectfully submitted JsJ Walter Frank Knowles”
and submits that it is not sufficient to vest jurisdiction in this Court.
Appellate jurisdiction of the subject matter and of the parties is acquired by the filing of a notice of appeal in the form and within the time required.1 The instant notice of appeal is deficient in that it does not contain the essential elements ■required by the Florida Appellate Rules,2 and unlike the situation which existed in the Seaboard Airline Railroad Company v. Holt,3 the contents do not constitute a substantial compliance with the applicable rule. The appellate courts of this state have consistently held that unless a notice of appeal is filed in the manner prescribed, jurisdiction is not vested in the appellate court.4 The timely and proper filing of a notice of appeal is a jurisdictional essential to enable an appellate court to exercise its power. Since the instant notice does not constitute a proper filing, the State’s motion is granted and the cause is dismissed.
■ CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Honorable Charles A. Carroll, 102 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1958)
- Seaboard AIR Line R.R. Co. v. Holt, 80 So. 2d 354 (Fla. 1955)
- Counne v. Saffan, 87 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 1956)
- DUE v. Tallahassee Theatres, Inc., 160 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- L'Engle v. Holmes, 44 Fla. 161 (Fla. 1902)