Hales v. State
This text of 260 So. 3d 413 (Hales 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.
Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed November 28, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D18-692 Lower Tribunal No. 18-3252 ________________
Gordon Hales, Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Mark Blumstein, Judge.
Gordon Hales, in proper person.
Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Magaly Rodriguez, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.
Before ROTHENBERG, C.J., and SALTER and LINDSEY, JJ.
ROTHENBERG, C.J. Gordon Hales appeals the trial court’s order issued on March 2, 2018
denying his petition for writ of habeas corpus relief. Because Hales’ petition is an
attack upon his conviction for sexual battery upon a child and the life sentence
imposed on April 27, 2000 in Broward County case number 95-3149-CF-10A,
which was affirmed on direct appeal, see Hales v. State, 792 So. 2d 469 (Fla. 4th
DCA 2001), the Miami-Dade County Circuit Court was without jurisdiction to rule
on the petition. Thus, the trial court should have dismissed Hales’ petition without
prejudice to allow him to file an appropriate motion or petition in the Seventeenth
Judicial Circuit. See Hales v. State, 957 So. 2d 699, 699-70 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)
(affirming the dismissal of Hales’ petition for writ of habeas corpus as the Miami-
Dade Circuit Court lacked jurisdiction to review the legality of Hales’ conviction
entered in another county, without prejudice to allow Hales to file an appropriate
motion in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit); Calloway v. State, 699 So. 2d 849, 850
(Fla. 3d DCA 1997) (concluding that a circuit court has no jurisdiction to review
the legality of a conviction and sentence imposed in another circuit court).
We, therefore, reverse the order denying Hales’ petition with instructions to
the trial court to dismiss the petition without prejudice to allow Hales to file his
petition in the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
2 ANY POST-OPINION MOTION MUST BE FILED WITHIN SEVEN DAYS. A RESPONSE TO THE POST-OPINION MOTION MAY BE FILED WITHIN FIVE DAYS THEREAFTER.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
260 So. 3d 413, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hales-v-state-fladistctapp-2018.