Williams v. State

770 So. 2d 713, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13299, 2000 WL 1513729
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Williams v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 710 So. 2d 24
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 13, 2000·No. No. 5D00-315·Published

Opinion

COBB, J.

The appellant, Lavictor Williams, entered no contest pleas to trafficking, possession, and carrying a concealed firearm, based upon an agreement with the state in regard to the filing of other charges. As part of the deal, Williams retained the right to appeal the habitual felony offender sentence imposed upon him.

On appeal the state concedes that Williams should have been sentenced under the guidelines rather than under section 775.084(1), Florida Statutes (1999). The state urges that, under the circumstances, it should be discharged from its bargain and, upon remand, be allowed to amend the information to add additional charges. The state’s argument and the cases it cites1 are inapposite, however, because the original plea agreement expressly contemplated Williams’ appellate challenge to the legality of the habitual felony sentence. The state is bound by that agreement.

[714]*714Accordingly, we reverse the sentence and remand for imposition of a sentence under the sentencing guidelines without amendment of the instant information.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

THOMPSON, C.J., and PLEUS, J., concur.

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

Williams v. State, 770 So. 2d 713, 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 13299, 2000 WL 1513729 (Fla. Ct. App. 2000).

770 So. 2d 713 (Williams v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jolly v. State
392 So. 2d 54 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Forshee v. State
579 So. 2d 388 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Clay v. State
750 So. 2d 153 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)