Norris v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Norris v. State

693 So. 2d 623, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2752, 1997 WL 134075

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 26, 1997

DocketNo. 96-01659

StatusPublished

This text of 693 So. 2d 623 (Norris 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

Norris v. State, 693 So. 2d 623, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 2752, 1997 WL 134075 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

BLUE, Judge.

Edward Norris appeals his habitual offender sentence which the trial court imposed after he entered a plea of no contest to burglary. We reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to permit Norris to withdraw his plea.

Prior to the acceptance of Norris’s plea, the trial court failed to confirm that Norris was personally aware of the consequences of receiving a habitual offender sentence. Such consequences include the maximum habitual offender term and the fact that habitualization may affect the possibility of early release. See State v. Wilson, 658 So.2d 521 (Fla.1995); Ashley v. State, 614 So.2d 486 (Fla.1993). Therefore, there was no showing that Norris knowingly and intelligently entered the plea.

Accordingly, we vacate Norris’s sentence and remand this case to the trial court to allow Norris the opportunity to withdraw his plea. See Bell v. State, 624 So.2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

DANAHY, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., concur.

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