MICHAEL ROGERS, 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.
Michael Rogers appeals a conviction where the trial judge initially recused himself but then sua sponte vacated the recusal order and continued proceedings without the defendant's consent. The appellate court reversed, holding that once a trial judge recuses himself, any subsequent orders he enters are void and of no effect.
The court held that once a trial judge recuses himself, all further orders entered by that judge are void and of no effect. Therefore, the judge's sua sponte vacation of his recusal order and subsequent proceedings were invalid.
[1] A trial judge's order of recusal renders subsequent orders issued by that judge void and of no effect.
[2] A defendant may reserve the right to appeal an unfavorable ruling on a motion to suppress evidence when entering a plea of nolo contendere.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Once the trial judge recused himself, further orders of his were void and of no effect”
States the core legal principle that a recused judge has no authority to enter subsequent orders
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRogers was arrested on June 6, 1974, for an incident initially charged as a misdemeanor. The case was transferred to Broward County Court, and 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 Void Order cases and more on FLexlaw
WADDELL, TOM, Jr., Associate Judge.
Appellant was arrested on June 6, 1974, by a City of Plantation policeman. Trial was set in Municipal Court for July 31st. On July 25th, upon appellant’s motion his case was transferred to the Broward County Court. A misdemeanor information was filed on August 6th. Trial was set for October 7th. On September 24th the state nolle prossed the misdemeanor information and the following day filed a felony information based on the June 6th episode. Appellant was arraigned and trial was set for January 20, 1975. On January 20th and March 10th appellant was granted two continuances. At a subsequent trial, appellant withdrew his not guilty plea and tendered a plea of nolo contendere to the felony charge, reserving his right to appeal an unfavorable ruling on a motion to suppress evidence. A pre-sentence investigation was ordered.
Prior to sentencing the appellant discharged the attorney who had represented him up to this point and hired new counsel. A motion to vacate and discharge was filed. At a hearing on said motion, while appellant was attempting to establish his right to relief under the 180 day rule, appellant’s attorney moved the trial judge to recuse himself. This motion was granted and the hearing terminated. Subsequently, the trial judge entered an order sua sponte vacating the recusal and setting the cause for further proceedings before himself. These proceedings were conducted over the objections of the appellant. We must reverse. Once the trial judge recused himself, further orders of his were void and of no effect (Gilmer v. Shell Oil Co., 324 So. 2d 171 (Fla.2d DCA 1975)).
This cause is remanded to proceed upon trial judge’s order of recusal.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
MAGER, C. J., and CROSS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Richard A. Bolt, M.D. v. Smith, 594 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…nc. v. Aquarius Condominium Association, Inc., 524 So. 2d 1012, 1014 (Fla.1988). However, Florida case law is well settled that once a trial judge has recused himself, further orders of the recused judge are void and have no effect. Rogers v. State, 341 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). Furthermore, in Mikos v. Sarasota Cattle Co., 453 So. 2d 402 (Fla.1984), the Florida Supreme Court held that once a plaintiff gives notice of readiness for trial, the trial judge must enter an order setting a date for trial. The…
-
Margulies v. Margulies, 528 So. 2d 957 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…See State ex rel. Harrison v. Whitehurst, 108 Fla. 465, 146 So. 589 (1933) (trial judge improperly reviewed and reversed his own order of disqualification); State ex rel. Rembrandt Corp. v. Thomas, 117 Fla. 127, 157 So. 337 (1934); Rogers v. State, 341 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), cert. denied, 348 So. 2d 953 (Fla.1977); see also Stringer v. United States, 233 F. 2d 947 (9th Cir.1956) (once having disqualified himself for cause, on [*961] his own motion, it was incurable error for the district judge to re…
-
Schwartz v. Schwartz, 431 So. 2d 716 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…counsel at the outset of the hearing, reasonable time had certainly and clearly lapsed by the time the judge entered the order. Moreover, while it is true that once a trial judge recuses himself, further orders thereafter are void, Rogers v. State, 341 So. 2d 196 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), cert. denied, 348 So. 2d 953 (Fla.1977); Gilmer v. Shell Oil Co., 324 So. 2d 171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975); Weiss v. Miami National Bank, 320 So. 2d 466 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), it is also the rule that a trial judge who recuses himself ha…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Gilmer v. Shell OIL Co., 324 So. 2d 171 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)