RABAH BENELHOCINE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, 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 defendant is precluded from challenging his plea and sentence on direct appeal because he failed to reserve the right to appeal a legally dispositive issue.
The defendant pleaded nolo contendere to aggravated assault. The trial court withheld adjudication, entered an order of probation, and mandated the de…
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 Legally Dispositive Issue cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Rabah Benelhocine appeals the judgment withholding adjudication on the charge of aggravated assault and the corresponding order of probation. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
In October 1996, Benelhocine pleaded nolo contendere to aggravated assault. The trial court withheld adjudication, entered an order of probation, and mandated that Benelhocine either leave the United States or serve 364 days in jail. On appeal, Benelhocine argues that his plea was not voluntary and intelligent because the trial court failed to inform him that he had to leave the United States “permanently.”
Pursuant to section 924.051(4), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996): “If a defendant pleads nolo contendere without expressly reserving the right to appeal a legally dispositive issue ... the defendant may not appeal the judgment or sentence.” Here, Benelhocine failed to reserve the right to appeal any dispositive issues. Moreover, he never filed a motion to withdraw his plea. Thus, Benelhocine is precluded from challenging his plea and sentence on direct appeal. See Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898, 902 (Fla.1979); Counts v. State, 376 So. 2d 59, 60 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal.
Dismissed.
PARKER, C.J., and FRANK and BLUE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hawk v. State, 848 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…3 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) (“When a defendant enters a plea of nolo contendere, absent a showing that the issue challenged on appeal is dispositive of the underlying case, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the issue.”) (citing Benelhocine v. State, 717 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998); White v. State, 661 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)); see also Jones v. State, 806 So. 2d 590, 592 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (“An issue is legally dispositive only if it is clear that regardless of whether the appellate court affirms or r…
-
Chapelle L. Teague v. State, 728 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…a of nolo contendere, absent a showing that the issue challenged on appeal is dispositive of the underlying case, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the issue. See White v. State, 661 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); see also Benelhocine v. State, 717 So. 2d 103 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). APPEAL DISMISSED. COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur. . § 790.01(2), Fla. Stat. (1997).…
Authorities Cited
- Gissendanner v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1979)
- Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1979)
- Counts v. State, 376 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)