Wilcher v. State
This text of 805 So. 2d 74 (Wilcher 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.
Opinion
Horace WILCHER, Appellant,
v.
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Robert C. Stone of Law Offices of Robert C. Stone, Boca Raton, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and James J. Carney, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
Because appellant's motion for relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 was pending during a time appellant's direct appeal was before this court, the trial court was without jurisdiction to rule on the motion, even though it was filed when no appeal was pending, and even though it was not ruled upon until after our mandate issued in the direct appeal, Wilcher v. State, 787 So.2d 150 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Accordingly, we remand to the trial court with directions to *75 dismiss appellant's 3.850 motion, without prejudice for appellant to timely file a new motion in compliance with the rule.
POLEN, C.J., GUNTHER and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
805 So. 2d 74, 2002 WL 54523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wilcher-v-state-fladistctapp-2002.