WILLIAM THOMAS BROWN
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A defendant who pleads nolo contendere without expressly reserving the right to appeal a legally dispositive issue has no right to direct appeal.
[1] A defendant who enters a nolo contendere plea without expressly reserving the right to appeal a legally dispositive issue pursuant to Florida Statute section 924.051(4) w…
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“[A] defendant who pleads nolo contendere with no express reservation of the right to appeal a legally dispositive issue, shall have no right to a direct appeal.”
Fla. Stat. (2021) § 924.06(3)
William Thomas Brown appealed a conviction following a nolo contendere plea. Brown did not expressly reserve the right to appeal any legally dispositi…
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 Legally Dispositive Issue cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
On consideration of William Thomas Brown’s motion for rehearing, the Court grants the motion for rehearing, withdraws our prior opinion, and substitutes the following opinion.
AFFIRMED. See § 924.06(3), Fla. Stat. (2021) (“[A] defendant who pleads nolo contendere with no express reservation of the right to appeal a legally dispositive issue, shall have no right to a direct appeal.”); § 924.051(3), Fla. Stat. (2021); see also Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii)(b); State v. Dortch, 317 So. 3d 1074, 1075 (holding that “there is no fundamental-error exception to the preservation requirement of rule 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii)(c)”); Leonard v. State, 760 So. 2d 114, 119 (Fla. 2000) (explaining that a district
court should summarily affirm “when the court determines that an appeal does not present . . . a legally dispositive issue that was expressly reserved for appellate review pursuant to section 924.051(4)”); Robinson v. State, 373 So. 2d 898, 902 (Fla. 1979) (discussing the limitations on the issues that may be raised on appeal when a defendant pleads guilty without expressly reserving the right to appeal a legally dispositive issue).
ROWE, C.J., and LEWIS and BILBREY, JJ., concur. _____________________________
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Gissendanner v. State, 373 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 1979)
- Leonard v. State, 760 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 2000)
- Javaughn Skinkle v. State (Fla. 5th DCA 2022)