Nelson v. State

113 So. 3d 1032, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8293, 2013 WL 2256523
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 24, 2013
DocketNo. 5D12-2894
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 113 So. 3d 1032 (Nelson 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
Nelson v. State, 113 So. 3d 1032, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8293, 2013 WL 2256523 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Tre Michael Nelson was charged by information with dealing in stolen property (specifically, jewelry), and entered a negotiated no contest plea, agreeing to pay restitution in an amount to be determined. At the subsequent restitution hearing, the State sought restitution attributable to the jewelry that Nelson pawned, plus additional jewelry stolen from the victim’s home during a burglary that preceded the crime with which Nelson was charged. The trial court ordered restitution for both amounts (a total of $20,000), and Nelson now challenges the restitution order. We reverse.

“[W]hen a defendant agrees to pay restitution as part of a plea agreement, the defendant’s agreement is .limited to restitution arising out of the offense charged by the State as reflected in the information and/or by the factual basis for the plea set forth by the State when the plea is entered.” Malarkey v. State, 975 So.2d 538, 540-41 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (citations omitted). Here, Nelson was only charged with dealing in stolen property, and the State’s presentation at the plea hearing was insufficient to link Nelson to the burglary or to place Nelson on notice that it intended to seek restitution from him based upon the burglary. Under these circumstances, the trial court erred in ordering restitution for more than the loss to the victim attributable to the charged crime. Id.1

Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new restitution hearing.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

TORPY, LAWSON and JACOBUS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Gabriel Verdejo v. the State of Florida
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2025

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
113 So. 3d 1032, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8293, 2013 WL 2256523, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nelson-v-state-fladistctapp-2013.