Marsh v. State

695 So. 2d 951, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7774, 1997 WL 375072
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJuly 9, 1997
DocketNo. 97-520
StatusPublished

This text of 695 So. 2d 951 (Marsh 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
Marsh v. State, 695 So. 2d 951, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7774, 1997 WL 375072 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Based on the state’s proper confession of error, we find that the court erred in denying Marsh’s motion for return of property seized at the time of arrest. The court improperly determined that it lacked jurisdiction to consider the motion. See Estevez v. Gordon, 386 So.2d 43 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980); Butler v. State, 613 So.2d 1348 (Fla. 2d DCA), cause dismissed 621 So.2d 1065 (Fla.1993). “Since mandamus is the proper procedure to test the correctness of the trial court’s determination that it was without jurisdiction,” we treat the notice of appeal as a petition for writ of mandamus and grant the petition. Estevez, 386 So.2d at 45.

Mandamus granted.

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

Related

Butler v. State
613 So. 2d 1348 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Estevez v. Gordon
386 So. 2d 43 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
695 So. 2d 951, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 7774, 1997 WL 375072, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/marsh-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.