STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
JONAH LEE EPPS, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court erred by granting a motion to dismiss without allowing the state to demur to or refute the facts presented.
Appellee was charged with robbery and kidnapping, then agreed to a nolo contendere plea to robbery. The court agreed to allow withdrawal of the plea i…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Demurrer cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from an order granting a motion to dismiss in a criminal case. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.190(c)(4).
Appellee was charged with three counts of robbery with a firearm and one count of kidnapping. At a court appearance appel-lee and appellant agreed to a negotiated plea of nolo contendere to one count of robbery with a firearm. The court sanctioned the plea agreement and then said
While you were out I talked to your attorney, and we’ve agreed he’s going to be permitted to file a motion, a C4 motion. The state and defense are going to stipulate to all the facts in this particular case. If, based on those facts, I find you are not guilty based on the law, then you’ll be permitted to withdraw this plea and you’ll be found not guilty. Do you understand that?
There is nothing in the record to indicate that the state ever stipulated to the facts of the case and even though the trial judge had agreed to have a later hearing to allow both sides to present their positions, this was not done. Instead, the judge granted the motion to dismiss without first giving the state the chance to demur to or refute the facts stated in the motion. Under the rule the state is entitled to have its say and was not afforded that due process here. The order of dismissal is reversed and this cause remanded for reinstatement of all charges against appellee and such further proceedings as are warranted.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
W. SHARP and PETERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Thomas v. State, 627 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…is a departure sentence that was not discussed at the sentencing hearing and only a brief note appears on the bottom of the scoresheet that indicates the reason to be “unscored offenses,” an insufficient reason for a departure. See Wilson v. State, 592 So. 2d 1233 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). He is entitled to the time served on the burglary conviction pursuant to Tripp and the 79 days he served prior to the sentence for grand theft. The credit for the four years served on the burglary conviction is subject to forfei…
-
Wilson v. State, 695 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997)…use none of the reasons given by the trial court supported departure in one of Wilson’s cases, we reversed and remanded for resen-tencing with directions that Wilson could not be sentenced to more than one cell above the guidelines. Wilson v. State, 592 So. 2d 1233 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). Unfortunately for Wilson, his counsel had filed a notice of appeal in only one case and thus the mandate applied to that case only. In the instant case, Wilson filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence under Florida Rule o…