State v. Siegel

662 So. 2d 1013, 1995 WL 681299
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedNovember 16, 1995
Docket95-516
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 662 So. 2d 1013 (State v. Siegel) 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
State v. Siegel, 662 So. 2d 1013, 1995 WL 681299 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Opinion

662 So.2d 1013 (1995)

STATE of Florida, Appellant,
v.
Mark Kevin SIEGEL and John A. McGlade, Appellees.

No. 95-516.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

November 16, 1995.

*1014 Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Ann M. Childs, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellant.

Denise VanNess, of VanNess & VanNess, P.A., Crystal River, for Appellee, Mark Kevin Siegel.

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Erin J. O'Leary, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellee, John A. McGlade.

GRIFFIN, Judge.

The state has attempted to appeal an order of the lower court which granted defendants' motions to suppress evidence. Ordinarily this court would have jurisdiction to review such a non-final order under Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.030(b)(1)(B) and 9.140(c)(1)(B). The record on appeal, however, does not contain a signed, written order of the trial court, and the state's response to this court's show cause order confirms that none was ever entered.

This court lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal of an unwritten or unsigned order. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g), 9.140(c)(2); State v. Smith, 557 So.2d 904 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). The state's request for us to temporarily relinquish jurisdiction in order for it to obtain a properly rendered order must be denied. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.110(m), permits an appeal to proceed where an appealable order is rendered prior to dismissal of a premature appeal; however, this rule is, by its terms, only applicable to final orders. Fla.R.App.P. 9.110(a), (m). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

GOSHORN and HARRIS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

State v. Knight
931 So. 2d 254 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)
State v. Johnson
892 So. 2d 563 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Pannier v. State
849 So. 2d 1105 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)
Davis v. Heye
743 So. 2d 1200 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Rivera v. State
726 So. 2d 322 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
State v. Blaney
722 So. 2d 220 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
662 So. 2d 1013, 1995 WL 681299, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-siegel-fladistctapp-1995.