Matheny v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Matheny v. State

429 So. 2d 1341, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19157

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 20, 1983

DocketNo. 82-515

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 429 So. 2d 1341 (Matheny 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

Matheny v. State, 429 So. 2d 1341, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19157 (Fla. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHOONOVER, Judge.

After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate any reversible error, and we therefore affirm the judgment and sentence entered by the trial court on January 22, 1982.

However, subsequent to the entry of the above-mentioned judgment and sentence, and the filing of a notice of appeal by the appellant, the trial court modified said sentence. Since the filing of the notice of appeal vested exclusive jurisdiction in this court, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to modify the sentence. Kelly v. State, 359 So.2d 493 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). We accordingly strike the order modifying the sentence appealed from without prejudice to the appellant filing a proper motion for modification of his sentence pursuant to the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.

AFFIRMED.

HOBSON, A.C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.

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

SCHOONOVER, Judge.

After reviewing the briefs and record on appeal, we find the appellant has failed to demonstrate any reversible error, and we therefore affirm the judgment and sentence entered by the trial court on January 22, 1982.

However, subsequent to the entry of the above-mentioned judgment and sentence, and the filing of a notice of appeal by the appellant, the trial court modified said sentence. Since the filing of the notice of appeal vested exclusive jurisdiction in this court, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to modify the sentence. Kelly v. State, 359 So.2d 493 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). We accordingly strike the order modifying the sentence appealed from without prejudice to the appellant filing a proper motion for modification of his sentence pursuant to the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.

AFFIRMED.

HOBSON, A.C.J., and DANAHY, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

429 So. 2d 1341, 1983 Fla. App. LEXIS 19157, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/matheny-v-state-fladistctapp-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack