Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

497 So. 2d 957

497 So.2d 957

11 Fla.L.Weekly 2392

Docket No. BK-187.

Booker v. State

Billy M. BOOKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided November 17, 1986.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1986-11-17

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“The sole purpose of the provision vesting jurisdiction in the circuit court to try felonies and misdemeanors is judicial efficiency and economy of time, in order for the felony and misdemeanor charges to be disposed of in a single proceeding. Once the trial court below granted the appellant's motion to sever, the intent of the constitutional provision was defeated, and any consideration of the relationship between the felony and misdemeanor charges became irrelevant. The circuit court was no longer the proper forum in which a separate trial on solely misdemeanor charges could be held.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including 704 So. 2d 197 - State v. Coble

Relies on 397 So. 2d 406 - Christopher v. State · 370 So. 2d 83 - Schueren v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1986-11-17

How this case has been cited

Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently December 2013

11 state decisions

501986199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1*958 Ted A. Stokes, Milton, for appellant.

¶2Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and John W. Tiedemann, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

¶3ERVIN, Judge.

¶4Appellant appeals his conviction of misdemeanor offenses, entered in circuit court, arguing that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to try the misdemeanor charges. We agree and reverse.

¶5The appellant was charged in circuit court with one felony and three misdemeanor charges. Upon defense motion, the felony charge was severed from the misdemeanor charges. Two separate jury trials were held in circuit court and appellant was found not guilty of the felony count, but guilty of all three misdemeanors. Because appellant was found guilty in circuit court solely on misdemeanor offenses, the circuit court, under the circumstances, lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

¶6Article V, Section 20(c)(3) of the Florida Constitution, provides that circuit courts shall have jurisdiction "of all felonies and of all misdemeanors arising out of the same circumstances as a felony which is also charged ..." See also § 26.012(2)(d), Fla. Stat. The sole purpose of the provision vesting jurisdiction in the circuit court to try felonies and misdemeanors is judicial efficiency and economy of time, in order for the felony and misdemeanor charges to be disposed of in a single proceeding. See Schueren v. State,370 So.2d 83 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). Once the trial court below granted the appellant's motion to sever, the intent of the constitutional provision was defeated, and any consideration of the relationship between the felony and misdemeanor charges became irrelevant. The circuit court was no longer the proper forum in which a separate trial on solely misdemeanor charges could be held.

¶7Since the question of whether a court has subject matter jurisdiction involves a claim of fundamental error which can be raised at any time, even for the first time on appeal, Christopher v. State,397 So.2d 406 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), we reverse the judgment and sentence entered on the misdemeanor charges.

¶8REVERSED.

¶9WIGGINTON and BARFIELD, JJ., concur.

/497/so2d/957 · .json · Public domain