Gloss v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gloss v. State

739 So. 2d 729, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12108, 1999 WL 729090

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 10, 1999

DocketNo. 99-414

StatusPublished

This text of 739 So. 2d 729 (Gloss 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

Gloss v. State, 739 So. 2d 729, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12108, 1999 WL 729090 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Miles Gloss appeals his sentences which were imposed by the trial court after he pled nolo contendere to the charges of burglary of a dwelling and grand theft.¹ He contends that the trial court erred in imposing a sentence which exceeded the sentence agreed upon in the plea agreement. See Roye v. State, 693 So.2d 1072 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); see also Russell v. State, 645 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). However, Mr. Gloss failed to raise this objection at the trial level, and he did not file a motion to correct his sentence. See F.la.R.Crim.P. 3.800. He also failed to file a motion to withdraw his plea. See Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.170(f). As a result, his claim of sentencing error has not been properly preserved for appellate review. See § 924.051(3), Fla.Stat. (1997). Accordingly, we affirm Mr. Gloss’ judgments and sentences without prejudice to the filing of a petition for postconviction relief.

JUDGMENTS and SENTENCES AFFIRMED.

ANTOON, C.J., HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Miles Gloss appeals his sentences which were imposed by the trial court after he pled nolo contendere to the charges of burglary of a dwelling and grand theft.¹ He contends that the trial court erred in imposing a sentence which exceeded the sentence agreed upon in the plea agreement. See Roye v. State, 693 So.2d 1072 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); see also Russell v. State, 645 So.2d 1087 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). However, Mr. Gloss failed to raise this objection at the trial level, and he did not file a motion to correct his sentence. See F.la.R.Crim.P. 3.800. He also failed to file a motion to withdraw his plea. See Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.170(f). As a result, his claim of sentencing error has not been properly preserved for appellate review. See § 924.051(3), Fla.Stat. (1997). Accordingly, we affirm Mr. Gloss’ judgments and sentences without prejudice to the filing of a petition for postconviction relief.

JUDGMENTS and SENTENCES AFFIRMED.

ANTOON, C.J., HARRIS and PETERSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

739 So. 2d 729, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 12108, 1999 WL 729090, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gloss-v-state-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack