From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitchell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Oct 29, 1998
719 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
Download
PDF
Check
Treatment

Summary

holding that a Rule 3.800(c) motion "is addressed to the discretion of the trial court; thus, an appellate court "has no jurisdiction to review the correctness of the trial court's disposition of the motion."

Summary of this case from McCarthan v. Jones
See 4 Summaries

Opinion

No. 98-1938.

October 29, 1998.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County; Kim A. Skievaski, Judge.

Ronald Patrick Mitchell, Appellant, pro se.

Robert Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The motion for reduction of sentence pursuant to Rule 3.800(c), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, is addressed to the discretion of the trial court. This court therefore has no jurisdiction to review the correctness of the trial court's disposition of the motion. See Daniels v. State, 568 So.2d 63 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).

BARFIELD, C.J., and ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.

Summaries of

Mitchell v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Oct 29, 1998
719 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

holding that a Rule 3.800(c) motion "is addressed to the discretion of the trial court; thus, an appellate court "has no jurisdiction to review the correctness of the trial court's disposition of the motion."

Summary of this case from McCarthan v. Jones

explaining that a rule 3.800(c) motion is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court and that an appellate court has no jurisdiction to review the correctness of the decision

Summary of this case from Fine v. State

explaining that a rule 3.800(c) motion is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court and that the appellate court has no jurisdiction to reviewthe correctness of the decision

Summary of this case from Baez v. State

explaining that a rule 3.800(c) motion is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial court and that the appellate court has no jurisdiction to review the correctness of the decision

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

Mitchell v. State

Case Details

Full title:Ronald Patrick MITCHELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Oct 29, 1998

Citations

719 So. 2d 1258 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

Citing Cases

Washington v. State

Having considered the appellant's response to this Court's order dated January 17, 2002, this appeal is…

Parker v. State

PER CURIAM.DENIED. Mitchell v. State, 719 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).BENTON, RAY, and OSTERHAUS, JJ.,…

11 Citing Cases