Reed v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Reed v. State

610 So. 2d 736, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 117, 1993 WL 5304

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 13, 1993

DocketNo. 92-04353

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 610 So. 2d 736 (Reed 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

Reed v. State, 610 So. 2d 736, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 117, 1993 WL 5304 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Louis Reed, Jr. appeals the circuit court’s order dismissing for lack of jurisdiction his motion for postconviction relief, which he filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Appellant filed his motion with the trial court after the opinion issued in the appeal of his previous motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a). Although the time for rehearing of the opinion had not expired when the appellant filed his motion, the mandate in that appeal issued six days before the court entered the dismissal. Hence, unbeknownst to the trial court, it had jurisdiction. We therefore reverse and [737]*737remand for the trial court to rule on the allegations of the motion.

Reversed and remanded.

RYDER, A.C.J., and PARKER and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Louis Reed, Jr. appeals the circuit court’s order dismissing for lack of jurisdiction his motion for postconviction relief, which he filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Appellant filed his motion with the trial court after the opinion issued in the appeal of his previous motion to correct illegal sentence filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a). Although the time for rehearing of the opinion had not expired when the appellant filed his motion, the mandate in that appeal issued six days before the court entered the dismissal. Hence, unbeknownst to the trial court, it had jurisdiction. We therefore reverse and [737]*737remand for the trial court to rule on the allegations of the motion.

Reversed and remanded.

RYDER, A.C.J., and PARKER and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

610 So. 2d 736, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 117, 1993 WL 5304, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reed-v-state-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack