From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hall v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Aug 1, 1997
697 So. 2d 237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

Opinion

No. 97-1476.

August 1, 1997.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Flagler County, Kim C. Hammond, J.

Larry W. Hall, Polk City, pro se.

No Appearance for Appellee.


Hall appeals from the trial judge's order summarily denying his motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. He sought to collaterally attack his convictions and sentences for multiple counts on two grounds: the evidence at trial was legally insufficient to support his conviction for armed burglary; and ineffective assistance of trial counsel for all counts. The merits of these claims appear doubtful.

However, since Hall has a direct appeal presently pending in this court challenging the same criminal convictions, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to rule on the motion. It is a nullity, and, similarly, any ruling we would make affirming or denying would be a nullity. See Johnson v. State, 646 So.2d 307 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Darden v. State, 604 So.2d 1256 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). Accordingly, we quash the order which is the subject of this appeal.

QUASH ORDER SUMMARILY DENYING MOTION.

COBB and ANTOON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Hall v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Aug 1, 1997
697 So. 2d 237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)
Case details for

Hall v. State

Case Details

Full title:LARRY W. HALL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Aug 1, 1997

Citations

697 So. 2d 237 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

Citing Cases

Walk v. State

Therefore, the trial court did not have jurisdiction to rule on the merits of Walk's motion, and the order…

Smith v. State

This is also the subject of his rule 3.850 motion. Although the appeal was dismissed on October 22, 2003, for…