In re the Interest of T.G.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

In re the Interest of T.G.

658 So. 2d 1018, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 460, 1995 WL 25325

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 25, 1995

DocketNo. 94-1807

StatusPublished

This text of 658 So. 2d 1018 (In re the Interest of T.G.) 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

In re the Interest of T.G., 658 So. 2d 1018, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 460, 1995 WL 25325 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged in a petition for delinquency with possession of cocaine, and after denying his motion to suppress, the court withheld adjudication and placed appellant on community control. Appellant has appealed the order withholding adjudication, and the state moves to dismiss on the ground that the order withholding adjudication is not an appealable order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b), citing Martin v. State, 600 So.2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

The state’s reliance on Martin is misplaced because the defendant in Martin was not a juvenile. As the first district explained in M.R.S. v. State, 478 So.2d 1166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), in which a juvenile was appealing an order withholding adjudication, the juvenile’s right to appeal arises under chapter 39, Florida Statutes, and this court’s appellate jurisdiction is thus invoked by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110, not 9.140(b). See also State v. C.C., 476 So.2d 144 (Fla. 1985).

The motion to dismiss appeal is therefore denied.

HERSEY, WARNER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

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

ON MOTION TO DISMISS

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was charged in a petition for delinquency with possession of cocaine, and after denying his motion to suppress, the court withheld adjudication and placed appellant on community control. Appellant has appealed the order withholding adjudication, and the state moves to dismiss on the ground that the order withholding adjudication is not an appealable order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b), citing Martin v. State, 600 So.2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

The state’s reliance on Martin is misplaced because the defendant in Martin was not a juvenile. As the first district explained in M.R.S. v. State, 478 So.2d 1166 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), in which a juvenile was appealing an order withholding adjudication, the juvenile’s right to appeal arises under chapter 39, Florida Statutes, and this court’s appellate jurisdiction is thus invoked by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110, not 9.140(b). See also State v. C.C., 476 So.2d 144 (Fla. 1985).

The motion to dismiss appeal is therefore denied.

HERSEY, WARNER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

658 So. 2d 1018, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 460, 1995 WL 25325, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-interest-of-tg-fladistctapp-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack