Lubin v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lubin v. State

87 So. 3d 1260, 2012 WL 1859636, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8262, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1219

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 23, 2012

DocketNo. 4D12-1069

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 87 So. 3d 1260 (Lubin 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

Lubin v. State, 87 So. 3d 1260, 2012 WL 1859636, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8262, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1219 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the dismissal of his rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief as premature. The trial judge concluded that she lacked jurisdiction to entertain the postconviction motion, in light of appellant’s pending appeal of the denial of a prior rule 3.850 motion. In light of our recent en banc opinion in Jackman v. State, 88 So.3d 325 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), we reverse. See id. (“We adopt the rationale of Bryant [v. State, — So.3d—, 2012 WL 28713 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)] and ... hold that a trial court has authority to consider or to defer ruling and stay a subsequently filed postconviction motion that raises unrelated issues, notwithstanding the pendency of an appeal of an order on a previously filed postconviction motion.”).

Reversed and remanded.

WARNER, DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the dismissal of his rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief as premature. The trial judge concluded that she lacked jurisdiction to entertain the postconviction motion, in light of appellant’s pending appeal of the denial of a prior rule 3.850 motion. In light of our recent en banc opinion in Jackman v. State, 88 So.3d 325 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), we reverse. See id. (“We adopt the rationale of Bryant [v. State, — So.3d—, 2012 WL 28713 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012)] and ... hold that a trial court has authority to consider or to defer ruling and stay a subsequently filed postconviction motion that raises unrelated issues, notwithstanding the pendency of an appeal of an order on a previously filed postconviction motion.”).

Reversed and remanded.

WARNER, DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

87 So. 3d 1260, 2012 WL 1859636, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 8262, 37 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lubin-v-state-fladistctapp-2012.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack