Legal Opinion
State v. Waterman
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided February 5, 1993No. 91-03843PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON MOTION TO DISMISS CROSS-APPEAL
2Per curiam
Pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c)(1)(B) the state has ap*566pealed the trial court’s pretrial order partially suppressing seized evidence. The defendant has cross-appealed that aspect of the order denying his motion to suppress all of the seized evidence.
The state seeks to dismiss the cross-appeal on the ground that it is not authorized by the appellate rules. Several district courts have held that there is no jurisdiction to entertain a cross-appeal when the order in question could not have been independently appealed by the defendant. See…
3Cases cited4 opinions
- State v. McAdamsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
- State v. ClarkDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- State v. WilliamsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
- State v. WillitsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
4Cited by3 opinions
- Lopez v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1994
- State v. LopezDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993
- State v. VitaleDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013