WALTER ISSIAC LAWRENCE, 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.
Appellant Lawrence appealed a conviction and sentence following a negotiated guilty plea to burglary and grand theft. The court quashed the appeal as frivolous, emphasizing that defendants who plead guilty without an express reservation of appeal rights cannot obtain direct appellate review and may only seek review through collateral attack.
No. A defendant who pleads guilty without an express reservation of the right to appeal has no right to a direct appeal and may only obtain review through collateral attack. The sentence was lawful and within prescribed limits.
[1] A defendant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere without an express reservation of the right to appeal has no right to a direct appeal and must seek review by collateral…
[2] An appeal from a sentence that is within lawful limits is groundless and frivolous.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“A defendant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere with no express reservation of the right to appeal shall have no right to a direct appeal. Such a defendant shall obtain review by means of collateral attack.”
Establishes the fundamental rule that direct appeals are barred after guilty pleas without reservation of appeal rights.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLawrence pleaded guilty to burglary and grand theft out of a twelve-count information, with the remaining charges being dismissed. The guilty plea was…
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 Anders Brief cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from a conviction and a sentence after a negotiated plea of guilty to two counts of a twelve count information.
The history of this case is rather short but is of great concern to this court. The public defender of the Seventh Judicial Circuit represented the appellant below, as he does on appeal. The appellant pleaded guilty to the charge of burglary and grand theft and the remaining charges were dropped. There was no motion to set aside the guilty plea and there is no question the appellant could not appeal the conviction after his guilty plea. His counsel on appeal, who was not the assistant public defender who represented appellant in the trial court, has assured us in his Anders1 brief that appellant cannot appeal after a guilty plea so the appeal attacking the conviction is groundless and frivolous. This is true because section 924.06(3), Florida Statutes (1979), provides:
A defendant who pleads guilty or nolo contendere with no express reservation of the right to appeal shall have no right to a direct appeal. Such a defendant shall obtain review by means of collateral attack.
See also Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla.1979); Counts v. State, 376 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).
The sentence is within the lawful limits and therefore an appeal from the sentence is groundless and frivolous. Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla.1979); Counts v. State, 376 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979).
Many hours and much money in public funds have been spent in a worthless fashion to reach no end but the one expressed in this opinion. The money and time spent in the representation of appellant in the trial court was well spent and the result reached was apparently a satisfactory one for society and the accused, appellant. The state attorney and the trial judge concurred with appellant and his counsel concerning the pleas, convictions and sentences. Then, for some reason unknown to this court, trial counsel filed a notice of appeal causing the clerk of the court to prepare a many-paged record on appeal; the court reporter to prepare two transcripts of proceedings in the trial court; the assistant public defender in charge of appeals to prepare a brief which had to be typed with many copies; the assistant attorney general to review the matter and file his brief and copies after his research, writing and typing was done; our clerk’s office to go through the many docketing and processing steps; a judicial aide of our court, a lawyer, to review the entire matter; and three judges of this court to spend time and effort in again reviewing the matter. The final result is that all agree, including the appellant who was given the opportunity to be heard, the appeal is groundless. We call it frivolous and deem it necessary to write this opinion to urge that something be done to assure that instances such as these do not occur again. The entire time-wasting, money-wasting and wheel-spinning procedure is not in anyone’s best interests and is disruptive of the justice system which should and could be better spent deciding truly important questions of law and disputes between parties.
Because this appeal is frivolous, is taken in a case where appeals do not lie, and is taken against good faith, it is quashed. Sec. 59.33, Fla.Stat. (1979).
APPEAL QUASHED.
FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., and SHARP, JJ., concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 388 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…error in denying appellant the right to withdraw his plea, no such motion was made in the trial court nor can we consider appellant’s notice of appeal as including such request. This issue must first be raised in the trial court. Lawrence v. State, 385 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Counts v. State, 376 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). The appeal is dismissed without prejudice to appellant seeking in the trial court whatever collateral relief may be appropriate. Appeal DISMISSED. COBB and FRANK D. UPCHURCH,…
-
Correal v. State, 387 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…o Section 924.06(3), Florida Statutes (1979) this alleged error is not subject to direct appeal. Having determined that appellant’s conviction must be affirmed for the reasons expressed above, we now direct counsel’s attention to Lawrence v. State, 385 So. 2d 167 (Fla.5th DCA, 1980) where Judge Dauksch speaks of the time and money wasted on frivolous appeals. Those comments are equally applicable here. Such conduct in the future will be met with appropriate sanctions. AFFIRMED. MOORE and BERANEK, JJ., and…
-
Tolbert v. State, 388 So. 2d 1295 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)…judgment of conviction entered upon a plea of guilty, Rule 9.140(b), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, except as to issues which occur contemporaneously with the entry of the plea. Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla.1979); Lawrence v. State, 385 So. 2d 167 (Fla.5th DCA 1980). There has been no motion in the trial court for leave to withdraw the plea. Counts v. State, 376 So. 2d 59 (Fla.2d DCA 1979). A dismissal of this appeal is without prejudice to appellant seeking collateral relief as may be approp…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- 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)