Kirkland v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kirkland v. State

593 So. 2d 1234, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2368, 1992 WL 38173

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 4, 1992

DocketNo. 91-0544

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 593 So. 2d 1234 (Kirkland 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

Kirkland v. State, 593 So. 2d 1234, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 2368, 1992 WL 38173 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

At the sentencing hearing, appellant moved to withdraw his plea based on his assertion that he did not understand the consequences of a habitual offender sentence. The state concedes that the trial court erred when it failed to conduct an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s motion. See Setzer v. State, 575 So.2d 747 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991).

Accordingly, we reverse appellant’s sentence and remand this case to the trial court with directions to conduct an eviden-tiary hearing on appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

LETTS, DELL and FARMER, JJ., concur.

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