FREDRIC BROWN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 2006-12-06
No. 4D05-4510
STEVENSON, C.J., WARNER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.
943 So. 2d 941 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2006) Positive Treatment
Cited by 1 case

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.

Synopsis

Fredric Brown appealed the trial court's denial of his motion to withdraw his no contest plea to drug and resistance charges. The court reversed because the trial judge failed to explicitly reject the plea agreement before sentencing, creating manifest injustice when Brown received ten years instead of the agreed one year and a day sentence.


Holding

Brown satisfied his burden of establishing manifest injustice. The trial court's failure to explicitly reject the plea agreement on the record, combined with the imposition of a sentence far exceeding the agreed term, constituted manifest injustice warranting withdrawal of the plea.


Headnotes

[1] A defendant seeking to withdraw a plea after sentencing bears the burden of demonstrating manifest injustice.

[2] A manifest injustice may occur when a defendant pleads no contest based on an agreement for a specific sentence, and the court imposes a greater sentence without clearly…

Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“when there has been a firm agreement for a specified sentence and the judge determines to impose a greater sentence, the defendant has the right to withdraw the plea”

Establishes the legal principle that a defendant can withdraw a plea when the judge imposes a greater sentence than agreed, citing Goins v. State.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Brown entered a no contest plea pursuant to a signed plea agreement requiring a one-year-and-a-day prison sentence. Before the change-of-plea hearing,…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

In this case, Fredric Brown was charged by information with possession of cocaine with intent to distribute and resisting arrest without violence. Brown pled no contest to these charges, as well as to failure to appear, but subsequently filed a motion to withdraw his plea pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(Z). Since the motion to withdraw the plea was filed after sentencing, Brown has the burden of establishing that a “manifest injustice” occurred. See Lopez v. State, 536 So. 2d 226, 229 (Fla.1988). We reverse the trial court’s denial of the motion because we find Brown satisfied this burden.

The signed plea agreement stated appellant was pleading no contest to the charges and the State was agreeing to a prison term of one year and a day. At some point (upon which the record is silent), the section on the plea form stating that the State agreed to that prison term was crossed out and written instead was “plea to the court.” Appellant presented the plea agreement at the hearing on his change of plea from not guilty to no contest, but was sentenced nonetheless to ten years in prison and one year in the county jail. Immediately thereafter, appellant moved to withdraw his plea, arguing that the trial judge promised him a year and a day.

The trial court never specifically rejected the plea agreement on the record prior to accepting the defendant’s plea.

The record and appellant were consequently unclear as to whether the judge had rejected the plea agreement. See Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.172(g) (“If the trial judge does not concur in a tendered plea of guilty or nolo contendere arising from negotiations, the plea may be withdrawn.”); Goins v. State, 672 So. 2d 30, 31 (Fla.1996) (stating “when there has been a firm agreement for a specified sentence and the judge determines to impose a greater sentence, the defendant has the right to withdraw the plea”). The confusion is further evidenced by the fact that appellant was sentenced to a downward departure, and on the form stating “Reasons for Departure — Mitigating Circumstances,” the trial court checked “Legitimate, uncoerced plea bargain.”

At the hearing on appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea, appellant testified that the agreed sentence of a year and a day was conveyed to him by his former defense counsel shortly before he entered the courtroom. Appellant further testified that defense counsel advised him he would be able to withdraw the plea if the court rejected the agreement. Since the former defense counsel was not called as a witness, Brown’s testimony about the advice he was given was unrefuted.

Accordingly, we reverse the order denying the motion to withdraw plea and remand with directions that appellant be allowed to withdraw his plea.

Reversed and Remanded.

STEVENSON, C.J., WARNER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Jerry v. State, 7 So. 3d 531 (Fla. 2009)
    …PER CURIAM. We have for review Jerry v. State, 943 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), in which the Fourth District Court of Appeal relied upon its decision in Yisrael v. State, 938 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (en banc), disapproved in part, 993 So. 2d 952 (Fla.2008), and certified conflict with the First Distr…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw