Mosley v. State

910 So. 2d 901, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 14305, 2005 WL 2205624
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 13, 2005·No. No. 1D05-0682·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his rule 3.800(a) motion for lack of jurisdiction. The trial court found that because the appellant has a pending appeal of the trial court’s order denying his rule 3.850 motion, the trial court was without jurisdiction to hear the appellant’s instant postconviction motion. However, because the issues presented in the instant rule 3.800(a) motion are separate and distinct from those presented in his rule 3.850 motion, the trial court had jurisdiction to entertain the appellant’s rule 3.800(a) motion. See Bates v. State, 704 So.2d 562 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Kimmel v. State, 629 So.2d 1110 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Accordingly, the trial court’s order is reversed and the appellant’s motion is remanded to the trial court for consideration on the merits.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

BENTON, PADOVANO, and BROWNING, JJ., Concur.

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

Mosley v. State, 910 So. 2d 901, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 14305, 2005 WL 2205624 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

910 So. 2d 901 (Mosley v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Contreras v. State
910 So. 2d 901 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)