Court Opinion

ID: 9720254
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 08:22:40.626427+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:03:16.880474
License: Public Domain

BRAUER, Acting P. J.
I concur in the decision and in all parts of the opinion except that dealing with the new trial.
As the lead opinion points out, the trial court had no jurisdiction to address the motion for new trial after the 60 days had run. The role of an appellate court is to review for error. It is absurd to have this court scrutinize the merits of a motion which the trial court did not have the power to grant. How could a trial court be faulted for abusing its discretion when it had no discretion but could legally go only one way? Appellate courts have enough to do. Jurisdiction means jurisdiction. The Shepard rule should be repudiated. Perhaps our Supreme Court can be persuaded to do it.