Martinez v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Martinez v. State

807 So. 2d 789, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1948, 2002 WL 246751

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 22, 2002

DocketNo. 2D02-56

StatusPublished

This text of 807 So. 2d 789 (Martinez 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

Martinez v. State, 807 So. 2d 789, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1948, 2002 WL 246751 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

PARKER, Judge.

Pablo Ortiz Martinez appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. Because the trial court dismissed the motion based on its apparent confusion between two codefendants, we are compelled to reverse and remand this case to the trial court to consider Martinez’s motion on its merits.

Jose Vasquez Martinez and Pablo Martinez were codefendants in circuit court case number 99-CF-22634. After Pablo Martinez was sentenced in September 2000, he filed a motion to correct sentence. The trial court dismissed this motion on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the motion because Pablo Martinez had a direct appeal of the same sentence pending in this court and mandate had not yet issued. The trial court attached to its order the notice of appeal allegedly supporting its ruling.

However, the notice of appeal attached to the trial court’s order was filed by Jose Martinez, not Pablo Martinez. This court has no record of a pending direct appeal for Pablo Martinez. It appears that the trial court may have confused the two co-defendants when reviewing the rule 3.800 motion and the notice of appeal, thereby [790]*790erroneously concluding that Pablo Martinez had a direct appeal pending before this court that deprived the circuit court of jurisdiction. Because Pablo Martinez does not have a direct appeal pending before this court, we reverse the trial court’s order dismissing Pablo Martinez’s motion and remand this case to the trial court to consider the motion on its merits.

Reversed and remanded.

NORTHCUTT and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.

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

PARKER, Judge.

Pablo Ortiz Martinez appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800. Because the trial court dismissed the motion based on its apparent confusion between two codefendants, we are compelled to reverse and remand this case to the trial court to consider Martinez’s motion on its merits.

Jose Vasquez Martinez and Pablo Martinez were codefendants in circuit court case number 99-CF-22634. After Pablo Martinez was sentenced in September 2000, he filed a motion to correct sentence. The trial court dismissed this motion on the grounds that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the motion because Pablo Martinez had a direct appeal of the same sentence pending in this court and mandate had not yet issued. The trial court attached to its order the notice of appeal allegedly supporting its ruling.

However, the notice of appeal attached to the trial court’s order was filed by Jose Martinez, not Pablo Martinez. This court has no record of a pending direct appeal for Pablo Martinez. It appears that the trial court may have confused the two co-defendants when reviewing the rule 3.800 motion and the notice of appeal, thereby [790]*790erroneously concluding that Pablo Martinez had a direct appeal pending before this court that deprived the circuit court of jurisdiction. Because Pablo Martinez does not have a direct appeal pending before this court, we reverse the trial court’s order dismissing Pablo Martinez’s motion and remand this case to the trial court to consider the motion on its merits.

Reversed and remanded.

NORTHCUTT and SALCINES, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

807 So. 2d 789, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1948, 2002 WL 246751, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martinez-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.