JOHN ANDERSON, 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.
John Anderson appeals his departure sentence imposed pursuant to a guilty plea. The Florida appellate court reversed because the plea agreement form contained contradictory provisions regarding whether the court could depart from sentencing guidelines without stating clear and convincing reasons, making the sentence imposed invalid.
The court reversed the sentence because the contradictory terms of the negotiated plea made the sentence legally infirm. A defendant's consent to a departure sentence cannot cure an ambiguous plea agreement, and the case was remanded to clarify the correct terms or allow withdrawal of the plea.
[1] A sentence imposed pursuant to a negotiated guilty plea must be reversed if the terms of the plea agreement are contradictory and ambiguous.
[2] A trial court cannot impose an illegal sentence pursuant to a plea bargain, even if the defendant has agreed to the departure sentence.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“Because the sentence imposed was predicated on the ambiguous plea agreement, the sentence must be reversed. Anderson's alleged consent to the departure sentence is of no significance.”
Establishes that ambiguous plea terms invalidate the sentence regardless of the defendant's apparent consent
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAnderson negotiated a guilty plea to murder in the second degree with a firearm and robbery with a firearm in Monroe County. The plea agreement form c…
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 Negotiated Plea Agreement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by John Anderson of his departure sentence of two concurrent sixty-year terms of imprisonment imposed pursuant to a negotiated guilty plea. We reverse the sentence since it is evident from the record that the terms of the negotiated plea are contradictory and ambiguous.
The circuit court in Monroe County utilizes a printed form for plea agreements. The form completed by Anderson contained contradictory provisions regarding the permissible sentence to be imposed pursuant to this guilty plea. Paragraph 5 stated in relevant part: “b. (X) The parties have agreed: That the Court may, but need not, depart from the Sentencing Guidelines without stating clear and convincing reasons therefore.” Paragraph 8 provided to the contrary:
8. I understand my sentence will be imposed under the Sentencing Guidelines. A presumptive sentence will be determined based upon certain factors. The Court can exceed this presumptive sentence and impose up to the maximum of Life on each Count by stating clear and convincing reasons. If the Sentencing Guideline range is exceeded, I will have the right to appeal my sentence.
The plea colloquy by the trial court further compounded the conflict between these provisions since the trial court obviously elected to be guided solely by paragraph 5. The court’s reliance upon paragraph 5 is evident from the following excerpt from the plea colloquy:
THE COURT: Mr. Anderson, under the terms of this plea, you are offering to plead guilty to the offense of murder in the second degree with a firearm, a lesser included offense of that which you have been charged with by indictment— murder in the first degree. And you are offering to plead guilty to the offense of robbery with a firearm as charged by information in the same case.
In return for that plea is that the Court may — but need not — depart from the sentencing guidelines without stating clear and convincing reasons.
Essentially, you are giving up your right to appeal your sentence should I sentence you outside the uniform sentencing guidelines; do you understand?
The trial court subsequently imposed a departure sentence without stating its reasons in writing. Because the sentence imposed was predicated on the ambiguous plea agreement, the sentence must be reversed. Anderson’s alleged consent to the departure sentence is of no significance. See Williams v. State, 500 So. 2d 501 (Fla.1986) (trial court could not impose illegal sentence pursuant to plea bargain although defendant had agreed to departure sentence).
This case is remanded to the trial court with directions to establish unequivocally the correct terms of the negotiated plea. If this alternative is not feasible, Anderson may withdraw his plea and stand trial.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Ibrahim Baez-Acuna, 559 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…d in Section 893.135, Florida Statutes (1987), following a plea, the sentence is reversed and the matter is returned to the trial court with directions to permit the defendant therein to withdraw his plea and proceed to trial. See Anderson v. State, 507 So. 2d 775 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); State v. Row, 478 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); State v. Samudio, 460 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Reversed and remanded with directions.…
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 500 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1986)