Beasley v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Beasley v. State

601 So. 2d 1278, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 7288, 1992 WL 148223

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 1, 1992

DocketNo. 92-01612

StatusPublished

This text of 601 So. 2d 1278 (Beasley v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beasley v. State, 601 So. 2d 1278, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 7288, 1992 WL 148223 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHOONOVER, Judge.

Beasley appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief. We reverse for further proceedings.

Beasley claims that he entered a negotiated plea to the offense of aggravated battery with great bodily harm while armed. [1279]*1279He contends it was agreed that he would receive three years in prison. Beasley further asserts that the guidelines scoresheet called for a maximum of three and one-half years. Beasley alleges that the court sentenced him to three years in prison to be followed by eighteen months community control and one thousand hours community service without giving him an opportunity to withdraw his plea.

We cannot discern from the record whether Beasley agreed solely to the three-year prison term or whether the plea agreement permitted the additional conditions. If Beasley’s claim is true, the trial court should have given him an opportunity to withdraw his plea. See Warren v. State, 572 So.2d 10 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). The trial court’s order of denial does not conclusively refute Beasley’s claim. We therefore reverse and remand to the trial court to either hold an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record refuting Beasley’s claim.

RYDER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SCHOONOVER, Judge.

Beasley appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief. We reverse for further proceedings.

Beasley claims that he entered a negotiated plea to the offense of aggravated battery with great bodily harm while armed. [1279]*1279He contends it was agreed that he would receive three years in prison. Beasley further asserts that the guidelines scoresheet called for a maximum of three and one-half years. Beasley alleges that the court sentenced him to three years in prison to be followed by eighteen months community control and one thousand hours community service without giving him an opportunity to withdraw his plea.

We cannot discern from the record whether Beasley agreed solely to the three-year prison term or whether the plea agreement permitted the additional conditions. If Beasley’s claim is true, the trial court should have given him an opportunity to withdraw his plea. See Warren v. State, 572 So.2d 10 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). The trial court’s order of denial does not conclusively refute Beasley’s claim. We therefore reverse and remand to the trial court to either hold an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record refuting Beasley’s claim.

RYDER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

601 So. 2d 1278, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 7288, 1992 WL 148223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beasley-v-state-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack