Townley v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Townley v. State

866 So. 2d 188, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 1828, 2004 WL 314910

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 20, 2004

DocketNo. 1D02-2890

StatusPublished

This text of 866 So. 2d 188 (Townley 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

Townley v. State, 866 So. 2d 188, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 1828, 2004 WL 314910 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant in this direct criminal appeal filed two timely Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motions by which he sought correction of various technical errors in the trial court’s revocation of probation order and judgment and sentencing documents. The trial court granted the appellant’s motions in all respects, but entered its order on the second motion after the expiration of the 60-day time limit set forth in the rule. Because the court lacked jurisdiction at the time, its order was a nullity. See Robinson v. State, 850 So.2d 658 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). We therefore remand this case to the trial court for correction of the revocation order and judgment and sentencing documents. The orders under review are otherwise affirmed.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and BENTON, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant in this direct criminal appeal filed two timely Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b)(2) motions by which he sought correction of various technical errors in the trial court’s revocation of probation order and judgment and sentencing documents. The trial court granted the appellant’s motions in all respects, but entered its order on the second motion after the expiration of the 60-day time limit set forth in the rule. Because the court lacked jurisdiction at the time, its order was a nullity. See Robinson v. State, 850 So.2d 658 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). We therefore remand this case to the trial court for correction of the revocation order and judgment and sentencing documents. The orders under review are otherwise affirmed.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and BENTON, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

866 So. 2d 188, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 1828, 2004 WL 314910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/townley-v-state-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack