From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Burch v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Nov 19, 1998
721 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

Summary

holding that trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider postconviction motion because the direct appeal was pending

Summary of this case from Robinson v. State

Opinion

No. 97-4555.

November 19, 1998.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County, Nancy Gilliam, J.

Appellant, pro se.

Robert Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.


Appellant appeals the denial of his postconviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court was correct in ruling that it lacked jurisdiction to consider appellant's postconviction motion because appellant's direct appeal was still pending. However, the trial court should have dismissed rather than denied appellant's motion because a denial generally serves as a ruling on the merits precluding the refiling of a successive motion. See, e.g., Daniels v. State, 712 So.2d 765 (Fla. 1998) (quashing district court opinion affirming and remanding for vacation of trial court's order of denial, where postconviction motion was prematurely filed while direct appeal was still pending). Accordingly, we quash the order of denial. Our disposition is without prejudice to appellant timely refiling his motion with the trial court if he has not done so already.

Appellant's direct appeal has since concluded with mandate issued March 12, 1998.

ORDER QUASHED.

MINER and LAWRENCE, JJ., and McDONALD, PARKER LEE, Senior Judge, concur.


Summaries of

Burch v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Nov 19, 1998
721 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

holding that trial court lacked jurisdiction to consider postconviction motion because the direct appeal was pending

Summary of this case from Robinson v. State

holding trial court should have dismissed motion for postconviction relief due to lack of jurisdiction rather than deny motion because denial acted as ruling on the merits of motion

Summary of this case from Lovett v. State

quashing order denying postconviction motion that was entered while direct appeal was pending and explaining that “the trial court should have dismissed rather than denied motion because a denial generally serves as a ruling on the merits precluding the refiling of a successive motion”

Summary of this case from Lowe v. State
Case details for

Burch v. State

Case Details

Full title:Thomas J. BURCH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Nov 19, 1998

Citations

721 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

Citing Cases

Williams v. State

However, the trial court should have dismissed the motion rather than denying it and addressing the merits.…

Wells v. State

However, such a prematurely filed motion should be dismissed rather than denied because a denial generally…