KIMBERLY BROWN, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed a five-year sentence imposed after probation revocation, rejecting the defendant's argument that the sentence was erroneous because it included sentencing guidelines points for misdemeanor convictions allegedly made without counsel, on grounds that the defendant agreed to the sentence as part of a valid plea bargain and made no evidentiary showing of lack of counsel.
A defendant who agrees to a sentence as part of a valid plea bargain cannot challenge that sentence on appeal, and unsupported assertions of lack of counsel cannot substitute for proper evidence.
[1] A defendant who enters into a valid plea bargain and agrees to a specific sentence cannot challenge that sentence on appeal merely because the sentence would be lower if…
[2] Unsupported assertions by counsel regarding lack of representation cannot substitute for proper documentary or testimonial evidence in challenging a sentence.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKimberly Brown's probation was revoked and she was sentenced to five years imprisonment. Brown appealed, arguing the sentence was erroneous because it…
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 Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal by the defendant Kimberly Brown from (a) an order revoking the defendant’s probation, and (b) a sentence of five years imprisonment imposed thereafter. The sole point on appeal is that the five-year sentence was in error because it was based on the defendant’s thirteen misdemeanor convictions for which, it was alleged, the defendant was not represented by counsel; it is urged that if the sentencing guidelines score for these convictions were eliminated, the maximum sentence the defendant could receive under the sentencing guidelines was four and a half-years imprisonment.
We reject this contention and affirm for two reasons. First, the defendant agreed to the aforesaid five-year sentence as part of a valid plea bargain and cannot now complain about the sentence on appeal; it is, of course, conceded that the sentence imposed was below the statutory maximum set for the crimes on which the defendant stands convicted. Smith v. State, 529 So. 2d 1106, 1107 (Fla.1988); Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380, 1382 (Fla.1988); Holland v. State, 508 So. 2d 5, 6 (Fla.1987). Second, no evidentiary showing was made below that the defendant had no counsel for the above-mentioned thirteen misdemeanor convictions; defense counsel merely claimed this to be the case during his argument to the court below. Such assertions cannot take the place of proper documentary or testimonial evidence. Price v. State, 519 So. 2d 76, 78 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); Croft v. State, 513 So. 2d 759, 761 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Powell v. State, 649 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…xterior search is sufficient to conclude that the validity of the stop ended before the retrieval of the dog. We conclude that Powell should have been allowed to leave once the officer determined that he had a valid temporary tag. See L.W. v. State, 538 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Thus, the continued detention was illegal, and the fruits of the search conducted after the unlawful detention should have been suppressed. We, therefore, reverse the trial court’s order denying the motion to suppress and remand…
-
Stanley v. State, 559 So. 2d 460 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)…ANSTEAD, Judge, dissenting. I would reverse on the authority of L. W. v. State, 538 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).…
-
Cooper v. State, 584 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…ANSTEAD, Judge, concurring specially. I agree with the majority that this case is similar to L. W v. State, 538 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Here, the officer stopped a vehicle being driven by a woman friend of appellant’s because there was no visible license plate on the vehicle. The vehicle was not being operated in any improper manner. The officer approached the dr…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Mullins, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla. 1988)
- Benny Ray Smith v. State, 529 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 1988)
- Bush Wade Holland v. State, 508 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1987)
- Jackson Croft v. State, 513 So. 2d 759 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)
- Benson Price v. State, 519 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)