State ex rel. Albano v. Nelson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State ex rel. Albano v. Nelson

363 So. 2d 1165, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16938

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 6, 1978

DocketNo. LL-295

StatusPublished

This text of 363 So. 2d 1165 (State ex rel. Albano v. Nelson) 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

State ex rel. Albano v. Nelson, 363 So. 2d 1165, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16938 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

SMITH, Acting Chief Judge.

Albano’s petition for writ of prohibition contests the trial court’s power to proceed in this criminal prosecution otherwise than by pronouncing judgment and sentence upon Albano’s plea of nolo contendere, tendered on condition that suppression issues be preserved for appeal. The trial court accepted the tendered plea, so conditioned, but later rejected the plea after inspecting the presentence investigation report, and undertook to require Albano to plead unconditionally. We consider that, for the reasons stated in State ex rel. Wilhoit v. Wells, 356 So.2d 817 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), the court was without power to reject a nolo contendere plea once accepted; that Albano is in jeopardy of judgment and sentence upon that plea; and that the trial court must now proceed to judgment and sentence. See also State ex rel. Milton v. Strickland, 361 So.2d 446 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).

The petition for writ of prohibition is GRANTED.

ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.

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

SMITH, Acting Chief Judge.

Albano’s petition for writ of prohibition contests the trial court’s power to proceed in this criminal prosecution otherwise than by pronouncing judgment and sentence upon Albano’s plea of nolo contendere, tendered on condition that suppression issues be preserved for appeal. The trial court accepted the tendered plea, so conditioned, but later rejected the plea after inspecting the presentence investigation report, and undertook to require Albano to plead unconditionally. We consider that, for the reasons stated in State ex rel. Wilhoit v. Wells, 356 So.2d 817 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), the court was without power to reject a nolo contendere plea once accepted; that Albano is in jeopardy of judgment and sentence upon that plea; and that the trial court must now proceed to judgment and sentence. See also State ex rel. Milton v. Strickland, 361 So.2d 446 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978).

The petition for writ of prohibition is GRANTED.

ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

363 So. 2d 1165, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 16938, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-albano-v-nelson-fladistctapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack