Schneider v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Schneider v. State

825 So. 2d 476, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12071, 2002 WL 1940164

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 23, 2002

DocketNo. 2D02-784

StatusPublished

This text of 825 So. 2d 476 (Schneider 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

Schneider v. State, 825 So. 2d 476, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12071, 2002 WL 1940164 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

FULMER, Judge.

John Thomas Schneider appeals the order of the trial court refusing to resentence him on case number 90-998 in accordance with the mandate of this court issued in Schneider v. State, 788 So.2d 1073 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (hereinafter “Schneider I”). The trial court concluded that resentencing was unnecessary because Schneider had already been resen-tenced in that case prior to the issuance of our mandate. Schneider argues and we agree that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to resentence Schneider prior to the issuance of our mandate. See Washington v. State, 637 So.2d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We therefore reverse the trial court’s order and remand the case for Schneider to be resentenced on counts I and III of case number 90-998 in accordance with the mandate issued in Schneider I.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing. _

BLUE, C.J., and KELLY, J„ Concur.

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

FULMER, Judge.

John Thomas Schneider appeals the order of the trial court refusing to resentence him on case number 90-998 in accordance with the mandate of this court issued in Schneider v. State, 788 So.2d 1073 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (hereinafter “Schneider I”). The trial court concluded that resentencing was unnecessary because Schneider had already been resen-tenced in that case prior to the issuance of our mandate. Schneider argues and we agree that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to resentence Schneider prior to the issuance of our mandate. See Washington v. State, 637 So.2d 296 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). We therefore reverse the trial court’s order and remand the case for Schneider to be resentenced on counts I and III of case number 90-998 in accordance with the mandate issued in Schneider I.

Reversed and remanded for resentenc-ing. _

BLUE, C.J., and KELLY, J„ Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

825 So. 2d 476, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12071, 2002 WL 1940164, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schneider-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack