Farley v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Farley v. State

55 So. 3d 721, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2691, 2011 WL 743435

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 4, 2011

Docket5D10-415

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 55 So. 3d 721 (Farley 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

Farley v. State, 55 So. 3d 721, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2691, 2011 WL 743435 (Fla. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Joseph Farley appeals the denial of a dispositive motion to suppress. Finding no error, we affirm. See Ortiz v. State, 24 So.3d 596 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009); P.B.P. v. State, 955 So.2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

We treat Farley’s motion to vacate the trial court’s order for restitution as a supplemental brief following the amendment of his notice of appeal. Although the trial court reserved jurisdiction to determine *722 restitution, because it conducted the hearing and entered the order after a notice of appeal had been filed, that order is without effect. See Nguyen v. State, 655 So.2d 1249, 1249-50 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Upon remand, the trial court may conduct a new hearing and again impose restitution.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; REMANDED.

GRIFFIN, TORPY and COHEN, JJ„ concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Joseph Farley appeals the denial of a dispositive motion to suppress. Finding no error, we affirm. See Ortiz v. State, 24 So.3d 596 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009); P.B.P. v. State, 955 So.2d 618 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007).

We treat Farley’s motion to vacate the trial court’s order for restitution as a supplemental brief following the amendment of his notice of appeal. Although the trial court reserved jurisdiction to determine *722 restitution, because it conducted the hearing and entered the order after a notice of appeal had been filed, that order is without effect. See Nguyen v. State, 655 So.2d 1249, 1249-50 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995). Upon remand, the trial court may conduct a new hearing and again impose restitution.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; REMANDED.

GRIFFIN, TORPY and COHEN, JJ„ concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

55 So. 3d 721, 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 2691, 2011 WL 743435, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farley-v-state-fladistctapp-2011.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack