Booker v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Booker v. State

693 So. 2d 73, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4318, 1997 WL 199366

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 25, 1997

DocketNo. 96-2942

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 693 So. 2d 73 (Booker 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

Booker v. State, 693 So. 2d 73, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4318, 1997 WL 199366 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to withdraw a guilty plea.

This is another example of why trial judges should avoid sentence bargaining. The state and the defendant agreed to an arrangement whereby appellant would plead guilty to certain crimes and the state would nolle prosequi other charges. It was also agreed in open court that the state would “recommend” a particular sentence involving sexwing time in a work-release program. The court accepted the plea agreement and sentenced appellant accordingly. There was no mention to appellant that certain qualifications need to be met to entitle him to serve his sentence in the woi’k-release program, even though the judgment contains the qualification wording. It was later determined he did not qualify.

Because appellant was given to understand . that his bargain with the state and the court restricted the time he would serve to a work-release program, he was misled into his plea. He should have been allowed to withdraw his plea and go to trial on all of the charges, including those which were nolle prosequied.

ORDER QUASHED; REMANDED.

COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

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

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion to withdraw a guilty plea.

This is another example of why trial judges should avoid sentence bargaining. The state and the defendant agreed to an arrangement whereby appellant would plead guilty to certain crimes and the state would nolle prosequi other charges. It was also agreed in open court that the state would “recommend” a particular sentence involving sexwing time in a work-release program. The court accepted the plea agreement and sentenced appellant accordingly. There was no mention to appellant that certain qualifications need to be met to entitle him to serve his sentence in the woi’k-release program, even though the judgment contains the qualification wording. It was later determined he did not qualify.

Because appellant was given to understand . that his bargain with the state and the court restricted the time he would serve to a work-release program, he was misled into his plea. He should have been allowed to withdraw his plea and go to trial on all of the charges, including those which were nolle prosequied.

ORDER QUASHED; REMANDED.

COBB and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

693 So. 2d 73, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4318, 1997 WL 199366, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/booker-v-state-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack