From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Newberry v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Oct 9, 2002
827 So. 2d 387 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Opinion

Case No. 4D02-2155

Opinion filed October 9, 2002

Appeal of order denying rule 3.853 motion from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County; Richard I. Wennet, Judge; L.T. Case No. 90-724 CFA02.

Richard L. Newberry, South Bay, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Monique E. L'Italien, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.


Appellant, Richard L. Newberry, appeals a circuit court order striking his motion for DNA testing filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.853. The circuit court struck the motion believing that it lacked jurisdiction due to a pending appeal by appellant from separate circuit court orders denying his 3.850 motion for post conviction relief. This was error as the motions were wholly unrelated. Cf. Norman v. State, 739 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999).

As the State now acknowledges, the circuit court had jurisdiction to entertain appellant's rule 3.853 motion. Therefore, we reverse and remand for the trial court to conduct further proceedings on the motion.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

KLEIN, STEVENSON and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Newberry v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Oct 9, 2002
827 So. 2d 387 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
Case details for

Newberry v. State

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD L. NEWBERRY, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Oct 9, 2002

Citations

827 So. 2d 387 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

Citing Cases

Neal v. State

Moreover, even if the postconviction appeal had still been pending, that should not have deprived the trial…

Gibson v. State

However, the trial court had jurisdiction to entertain the unrelated rule 3.850 motion. See Newberry v.…