Bynum v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Bynum v. State

784 So. 2d 555, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 6587, 2001 WL 497327

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 11, 2001

DocketNo. 5D01-480

StatusPublished

This text of 784 So. 2d 555 (Bynum v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Bynum v. State, 784 So. 2d 555, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 6587, 2001 WL 497327 (Fla. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

SHARP, W., J.

Bynum appeals from the circuit court’s dismissal of his motion for post-conviction relief for lack of jurisdiction filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, in which he sought post-conviction relief. The judge below dismissed By-num’s motion because it appeared his appeal was still pending in this court and thus the circuit court lacked jurisdiction. However, this court’s mandate, which concluded that appeal, was rendered on December 22, 2000. Thus, on January 3, [556]*5562001, when the circuit court ruled in this cause, it had jurisdiction.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand so that the circuit court can address Bynum’s 3.850 motion on the merits. See, e.g., Summers v. State, 695 So.2d 893 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

SAWAYA and PLEUS, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SHARP, W., J.

Bynum appeals from the circuit court’s dismissal of his motion for post-conviction relief for lack of jurisdiction filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, in which he sought post-conviction relief. The judge below dismissed By-num’s motion because it appeared his appeal was still pending in this court and thus the circuit court lacked jurisdiction. However, this court’s mandate, which concluded that appeal, was rendered on December 22, 2000. Thus, on January 3, [556]*5562001, when the circuit court ruled in this cause, it had jurisdiction.

Accordingly, we reverse and remand so that the circuit court can address Bynum’s 3.850 motion on the merits. See, e.g., Summers v. State, 695 So.2d 893 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997).

REVERSED and REMANDED.

SAWAYA and PLEUS, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

784 So. 2d 555, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 6587, 2001 WL 497327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bynum-v-state-fladistctapp-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack