Nelson v. State

555 So. 2d 897, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 99, 1990 WL 950
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Nelson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 543 So. 2d 1308
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 9, 1990·No. No. 89-744·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

On appeal, Basil Nelson contends that the trial court erred in deviating from a written plea agreement he entered into with the state. Because the record shows that the court took no evidence at the sentencing hearing but instead relied upon representations of counsel, we vacate the sentence entered and remand for an evidentia-ry hearing and appropriate sentencing. “[Representations by counsel not made under oath and not subject to cross-examination, absent a stipulation, are not evidence.” State v. T.A., 528 So.2d 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (citations omitted).

Sentence vacated; remanded with instructions.

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

Nelson v. State, 555 So. 2d 897, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 99, 1990 WL 950 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

555 So. 2d 897 (Nelson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. T.A.
528 So. 2d 974 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)