STATE OF FLORIDA v. AMANDA MARIE DAHL

District Court of Appeal of Florida

STATE OF FLORIDA v. AMANDA MARIE DAHL

227 So. 3d 744, 2017 WL 4280601

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 27, 2017

Docket4D16-3001

StatusPublished

This text of 227 So. 3d 744 (STATE OF FLORIDA v. AMANDA MARIE DAHL) 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 OF FLORIDA v. AMANDA MARIE DAHL, 227 So. 3d 744, 2017 WL 4280601 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

Opinion

Klingensmith, J.

Amanda Marie Dahl (“Appellee”) entered a guilty plea to one count of leaving the scene of a crash involving death, a first degree felony. She was sentenced to 364 days in jail and ten years’ probation with several special conditions. Over the State’s objection, the trial court entered an order withholding adjudication of guilt. The State appealed this order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c)(l)(L).

After the State’s notice of appeal was filed, the trial court recognized its mistake, entered an order that its previous withhold of adjudication was now “converted” to an adjudication of guilt, issued a new sentencing order, and amended the judgment to adjudicate Appellee guilty. Thereafter, the State filed its motion to quash the amended judgment and sentencing order, arguing that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter an amended judgment adjudicating Appellee guilty because the State already filed a notice of appeal and an appellate case number was assigned. The court denied that motion without a hearing. Our review is de novo. Cromartie v. State, 70 So.3d 559, 563 (Fla. 2011).

As Appellee concedes, the trial court erred in this case because section 775.08435(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2015), prohibits a court from withholding adjudication of guilt for “[a]ny capital, life, or first degree felony offense.” See also State v. Foster, 114 So.3d 422, 422 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (reversing trial court’s withhold of adjudication on a first degree felony, and remanding for an adjudication of guilt).

Further, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter its corrected sentencing order and amended judgment because the trial court was divested of jurisdiction when the State filed its appeal. See Gonzalez v. State, 384 So.2d 57, 58 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (filing notice of appeal vested exclusive jurisdiction in appellate court and trial court was prohibited from modifying sentence after appeal was filed).

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s withhold of adjudication and remand for entry of an adjudication of guilt.

Reversed and Remanded.

Conner and Forst, JJ., concur.

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

Klingensmith, J.

Amanda Marie Dahl (“Appellee”) entered a guilty plea to one count of leaving the scene of a crash involving death, a first degree felony. She was sentenced to 364 days in jail and ten years’ probation with several special conditions. Over the State’s objection, the trial court entered an order withholding adjudication of guilt. The State appealed this order under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c)(l)(L).

After the State’s notice of appeal was filed, the trial court recognized its mistake, entered an order that its previous withhold of adjudication was now “converted” to an adjudication of guilt, issued a new sentencing order, and amended the judgment to adjudicate Appellee guilty. Thereafter, the State filed its motion to quash the amended judgment and sentencing order, arguing that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to enter an amended judgment adjudicating Appellee guilty because the State already filed a notice of appeal and an appellate case number was assigned. The court denied that motion without a hearing. Our review is de novo. Cromartie v. State, 70 So.3d 559, 563 (Fla. 2011).

As Appellee concedes, the trial court erred in this case because section 775.08435(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2015), prohibits a court from withholding adjudication of guilt for “[a]ny capital, life, or first degree felony offense.” See also State v. Foster, 114 So.3d 422, 422 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013) (reversing trial court’s withhold of adjudication on a first degree felony, and remanding for an adjudication of guilt).

Further, the trial court lacked jurisdiction to enter its corrected sentencing order and amended judgment because the trial court was divested of jurisdiction when the State filed its appeal. See Gonzalez v. State, 384 So.2d 57, 58 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (filing notice of appeal vested exclusive jurisdiction in appellate court and trial court was prohibited from modifying sentence after appeal was filed).

Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s withhold of adjudication and remand for entry of an adjudication of guilt.

Reversed and Remanded.

Conner and Forst, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

227 So. 3d 744, 2017 WL 4280601, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-florida-v-amanda-marie-dahl-fladistctapp-2017.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack