RICKY RATUSHINAK, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Juvenile bindover defendant's plea bargain sentence for attempted first-degree murder is affirmed, but he may file a motion to withdraw his guilty plea if he can show confusion about the court's retention of jurisdiction over his sentence.
A juvenile bindover defendant's sentence is affirmed where his guilty plea was entered with knowledge of the sentence, but he may challenge the plea if there was confusion about the scope of the court's retained jurisdiction.
[1] A juvenile bindover defendant may file a motion to withdraw a guilty plea under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 if confusion exists regarding the trial court's r…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA juvenile was bound over to adult court and entered a guilty plea to attempted first-degree murder, receiving four years in prison followed by two ye…
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 Retention Of Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
As a juvenile bindover to the adult division, the defendant entered into a plea bar gain on a charge of attempted first degree murder pursuant to which he was sentenced to four years in the state penitentiary followed by two years in a community control program. In addition, the court specifically retained jurisdiction over one-third of the defendant’s youthful offender sentence. The defendant has appealed his sentence contending that: (a) .he was entitled to credit for time served between his arrest and transfer to circuit court, and for time served in the juvenile detention center while awaiting trial; and (b) the trial judge erred in retaining jurisdiction over one-third of his sentence. We affirm.
We decline to reach the issue of credit for time served because it appears on the record that the defendant’s guilty plea was entered with knowledge of the sentence which the judge would impose. As to the second point, however, we find that the court verbally indicated that it would retain jurisdiction for one year, not one-third (two years) of the sentence. It may be, therefore, that the guilty plea was entered as a result of confusion. For this reason, the sentence is affirmed without prejudice to the defendant filing a motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 to withdraw his guilty plea.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McINTYRE v. State, 427 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…the point— which essentially concerns the voluntariness and knowledgeability of the plea, Viars v. State, 415 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)— may not be raised on this direct appeal. Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla.1979); Ratushinak v. State, 425 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Medina v. State, 411 So. 2d 323 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Griffin v. State, 403 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). The judgment and sentences are therefore affirmed without prejudice to the filing of an appropriate motion under Fla.R.Cri…