State v. Gibson

353 So. 2d 670
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJanuary 6, 1978
Docket77-995
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 353 So. 2d 670 (State v. Gibson) 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 v. Gibson, 353 So. 2d 670 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Opinion

353 So.2d 670 (1978)

STATE of Florida, Appellant,
v.
Tajuana Iona GIBSON, Appellee.

No. 77-995.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

January 6, 1978.

*671 James A. Gardner, State's Atty., and Thomas M. Fitzgibbons, Asst. State's Atty., Sarasota, for appellant.

Jack O. Johnson, Public Defender, and David S. Bergdoll, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant in this case entered a plea of nolo contendere to a charge of aggravated battery by use of a firearm. After hearing from the victim of the battery who said that the defendant was justified under the circumstances in shooting him, the court withheld adjudication of guilt and placed defendant on probation for one year. The state then pursued an appeal in this court.

We first note that the state cannot appeal the order of the trial court under Section 924.07, Florida Statutes (1975). State v. Wilcox, 351 So.2d 89 (Fla.2d DCA 1977). However, we choose to treat the state's appeal as a petition for certiorari, and we grant certiorari because we believe that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law.

The crime with which the state charged appellant is one of those covered by the mandatory sentencing statute, Section 775.087(2), Florida Statutes (1975). Under this section a trial court may not withhold adjudication or suspend sentence and must sentence a defendant to a term of at least three years in prison. Therefore, we must vacate the order of the trial court and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. However, nothing we have said here should be construed as preventing the trial court from allowing the defendant to withdraw her plea.

HOBSON, A.C.J., and GRIMES and RYDER, JJ., concur.

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

Related

State v. LaFave
113 So. 3d 31 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
State v. Pettis
520 So. 2d 250 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1988)
R.L.B. v. State
486 So. 2d 588 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1986)
Jones v. State
477 So. 2d 566 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1985)
State v. McGraw
474 So. 2d 289 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
State v. Muoio
438 So. 2d 160 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
State v. GP
429 So. 2d 786 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
353 So. 2d 670, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-gibson-fladistctapp-1978.