Myles v. State

678 So. 2d 858, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8491, 1996 WL 449778
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Myles v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 7632
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 12, 1996·No. No. 95-2878·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of a prison sentence entered following his admission that he [859]*859had violated the terms of his probation. He claims that he is entitled to -withdraw his admission because the sentence imposed was not consistent with his understanding of an agreement that had been reached with the state, and the trial court denied him an opportunity to explain the agreement as he understood it. Because appellant did not move in the trial court to withdraw his admission, we affirm. See Robinson v. State, 373 So.2d 898 (Fla.1979) (issues regarding voluntary or intelligent nature of plea must first be presented to trial court by motion to withdraw plea). Because there is nothing in the record to suggest any agreement of any type between the state and appellant regarding a sentence, we conclude that Goins v. State, 672 So.2d 30 (Fla.1996), upon which appellant relies, is inapplicable.

AFFIRMED.

ALLEN, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.

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

Myles v. State, 678 So. 2d 858, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 8491, 1996 WL 449778 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

678 So. 2d 858 (Myles v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Goins v. State
672 So. 2d 30 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)
Robinson v. State
373 So. 2d 898 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1979)