JESSE GRAY, 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 an appeal filed more than ninety days after the judgment was entered is untimely and deprives the court of jurisdiction.
Appellant was convicted of robbery and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle and sentenced. He later filed a motion to vacate the judgment, which was de…
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 Rule 1 cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant was charged in the Court of Record of Escambia County with the offenses of robbery and unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. He was represented by the public defender under appointment by the court. He pleaded nolo contendere to both counts of the information and on May 18, 1964, was sentenced to serve a term of ten years imprisonment in the state prison.
On September 3, 1965, appellant filed in the trial court a motion pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix in which he prayed that the judgment and sentence rendered against him on May 18, 1964, be vacated and set aside on the ground that he was not provided with the assistance of counsel at the moment of his arrest and prior to interrogation by police officers. Appellant’s motion for relief was denied by the trial court by order rendered on September 10, 1965.
On October 4, 1965, appellant filed his notice of appeal in this case in which he recites that the appeal is for the purpose of reviewing the order, judgment, or decree of the Court of Record of Escambia County bearing the date of May 18, 1964, and recorded on the same date in case number 64— 474. No appeal has been taken by appellant from the order of September 10, 1965, denying his motion for relief filed pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 1.
Appeals from judgments of conviction rendered in criminal cases must be taken within ninety days after the judgment is entered.1 Since the appeal in this case was taken more than ninety days subsequent to the entry of the judgment herein on May 18, 1964, the appeal is not timely filed and this court is without jurisdiction to further consider the appeal. The appeal herein is accordingly dismissed sua sponte.
RAWLS, C. J., and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Williams v. State, 324 So. 2d 74 (Fla. 1975)…C. J., ROBERTS, BOYD, OVERTON and ENGLAND, JJ., and KLEIN, Circuit Judge, concur. . It should be noted that this Court’s decision in State ex rel. Ervin v. Smith, 160 So. 2d 518 (Fla.1964), and the First District Court’s decision in Gray v. State, 184 So. 2d 222 (Fia.App. 1st 1966), were cited as controlling authority as to this point in the concurring opinion in Thomas v. City of Gaines-ville, supra. We do not deem them to be controlling upon this issue since both involved the untimely filing of a notice o…
-
Thomas v. The City OF Gainesville, 220 So. 2d 644 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)…of the parties. The constitutionally guaranteed right of appeal should not be denied merely because of the technical violation of a procedural rule which does not result in demonstrable prejudice to the other party. . Gray v. State, (Fla.App.1966) 184 So. 2d 222; State ex rel. Ervin v. Smith, (Fla.1964) 160 So. 2d 518. . State ex rel. Moore v. Murphree, (Fla.App.1958) 106 So. 2d 430. . Clark v. State, (Fla.App.1966) 191 So. 2d 870. . Woolley v. State, (Fla.App.1967) 193 So. 2d 706.…