Bouchier v. State

915 So. 2d 744, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 19813, 2005 WL 3328372
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 9, 2005
DocketNo. 5D05-663
StatusPublished

This text of 915 So. 2d 744 (Bouchier 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
Bouchier v. State, 915 So. 2d 744, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 19813, 2005 WL 3328372 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

ORFINGER, J.

Following the denial of his motion to suppress, Patrick Bouchier pled guilty to possession of a controlled substance and possession of drug paraphernalia., He now appeals, contending that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress. Because we lack jurisdiction to consider Bouchier’s claim, we dismiss the appeal.

Bouchier entered his plea without reserving the right to appeal. “A defendant who pleads guilty with no express reservation of the right to appeal a legally disposi-tive issue ... shall have no right to a direct appeal.” § 924.06(3), Fla. Stat. (2005).1 This Court has consistently held that absent an express reservation of the right to appeal at the time a plea is entered, the appeal must be dismissed. See e.g., Hawk v. State, 848 So.2d 475 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003). Because Bouchier entered his plea without reserving his right to appeal the ruling on his motion to suppress, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider Bou-chier’s claims and must dismiss the appeal.

DISMISSED.

SHARP, W. and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Hawk v. State
848 So. 2d 475 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
915 So. 2d 744, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 19813, 2005 WL 3328372, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bouchier-v-state-fladistctapp-2005.