Rudolph v. State

874 So. 2d 1272, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8340, 2004 WL 1301106
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Rudolph v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 832 So. 2d 826
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 14, 2004·No. No. 1D04-0302·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, James Lee Rudolph, Jr., appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. Because the trial court lacked jurisdiction at the time the motion was considered and ruled on, we vacate the trial court’s order without addressing the merits of the motion.

The trial court denied the appellant’s instant motion on December 19, 2003, while an appeal from the denial of the [1273]*1273appellant’s previously filed motion to withdraw his plea was pending in this Court. Because the appellant raised similar grounds in both motions, the trial court did not have jurisdiction at the time the instant motion was considered. See Williams v. State, 795 So.2d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). However, because this Court affirmed the trial court’s denial of the appellant’s previous motion to withdraw his plea on February 24, 2004, jurisdiction has now returned to the trial court.

Accordingly, the trial court’s order is VACATED and the cause REMANDED.

WOLF, C.J., KAHN and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

Rudolph v. State, 874 So. 2d 1272, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 8340, 2004 WL 1301106 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

874 So. 2d 1272 (Rudolph v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Williams v. State
795 So. 2d 975 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)