Cross v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• \[W]e have recognized that trial courts lack jurisdiction to consider the merits of a defendant's rule 3.850 motion while the direct appeal of the defendant's judgment and sentence is pending.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

2 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Meintzer v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-12-08· cited 4×
• Ross v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2007-02-07· cited 4×

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Palma Sola Harbour Condominium, Inc. v. Huber
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1979-09-14· cited 25×
• Snipes v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-05-09· cited 11×
• Johnson v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1995-05-12· cited 4×
• Jones v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2001-02-14· cited 4×
• Ali v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1999-05-21· cited 3×
• Ottesen v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-05-09· cited 3×
• Mitchell v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2003-04-23· cited 3×
• Hartley v. State
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-05-05· cited 2×
• Tarquinio v. Department of Children & Families
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2006-06-21· cited 1×