MICHAEL ALLEN JOHNSON, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed conviction for drug paraphernalia possession because the trial court violated the plea agreement by adjudicating guilt when the agreement required withholding adjudication, though the court upheld the probation condition restricting defendant's presence in a high-crime area as rationally related to his drug history.
A trial court violates a plea agreement by adjudicating guilt when the agreement requires withholding adjudication, requiring reversal and remand for compliance or withdrawal of the plea.
[1] A probation condition restricting a defendant's presence in a specific geographic area is proper when the defendant's criminal history and prior arrests in that area esta…
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 intelligence“the adjudication of guilt was in violation of the plea agreement and thus error”
The court agreed with Johnson's allegation that the trial court violated the plea agreement by adjudicating guilt.
Michael Johnson pleaded nolo contendere to drug paraphernalia possession pursuant to a plea agreement, but the trial court adjudicated him guilty in v…
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 Rational Relationship Test cases and more on FLexlaw
GOSHORN, Judge.
Michael Johnson appeals his adjudication of guilt of possession of drug paraphernalia after a plea of nolo contendere pursuant to a plea agreement.1 He alleges and the state agrees that the adjudication of guilt was in violation of the plea agreement and thus error. Johnson also urges as error the imposition of a term of his probation which banned him from coming within one block of an area in the City of Melbourne characterized as a high crime area known for drug trafficking. Johnson lived in this area with his mother while his wife was stationed in Germany. Johnson had a history of drug related problems and had, in fact, been arrested twice previously on the very street where his mother’s home was located. We conclude that these facts established a rational relationship between the crimes for which Johnson had been convicted and the challenged condition. Thus, the condition was proper as an attempt to deter future criminal conduct. Tucker v. State, 529 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988) and Cole v. State, 521 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988).
Accordingly, the judgment is reversed and remanded to the trial court with instructions to comply with the plea agreement regarding the adjudication of guilt or, in the alternative, to allow the defendant to withdraw his plea.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
COBB and COWART, JJ., concur. . Johnson had also entered pleas to two counts of possession of cocaine, one count of loitering and prowling and an additional count of possession of paraphernalia.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Allen v. State, 645 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)…hich Alen was convicted and forbids conduct which is reasonably related to prohibiting future criminality. Biller v. State, 618 So. 2d 734 (Fla.1993). “Thus, the condition was proper as an attempt to deter future criminal conduct.” Johnson v. State, 547 So. 2d 1048 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). ' Mfirmed but remanded with directions. RYDER, A.C.J., and ALTENBERND and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Kokx v. State, 521 So. 2d 297 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Thomas v. Thomas, 529 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)
- Tucker v. State, 529 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)