ROBERTO VALDES, 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.
The court held that a defendant's failure to appear for sentencing, as stipulated in a plea agreement, constitutes a clear and convincing reason for departure from sentencing guidelines.
Appellant entered a plea agreement to avoid a minimum mandatory sentence for drug trafficking, agreeing to cooperate and appear for sentencing. He fai…
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 Plea Agreement Construction cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Roberto Valdes, appeals his sentence imposed pursuant to a plea agreement. We affirm.
Appellant was arrested and charged with trafficking in cocaine. Appellant entered into a plea agreement with the State. By entering this plea, he could avoid the minimum mandatory sentence for drug trafficking. Appellant entered into this plea against advice of counsel.
The plea agreement provided, inter alia, that in exchange for the reduced sentence, appellant was to cooperate in future drug investigations, take a polygraph examination, and appear at all future proceedings. The plea agreement specifically provided:
It is further agreed between the parties that if the Defendant fails to appear for sentencing on the date set by the Court, the Court shall enter a finding of guilt, an adjudication of guilt and sentence the Defendant to thirty (30) years in the State prison with a minimum mandatory sentence of fifteen (15) years and the appropriate mandatory fine.
Subsequently, appellant failed to appear for sentencing and was sentenced to the term provided for in the plea agreement. Appellant contends that the sentence, outside the guidelines, was invalid.
Failing to appear, pursuant to a plea agreement, constitutes a clear and convincing reason for departure. Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1988). We find no error in the sentence thus imposed.
Appellant also claims that his guilty plea was not voluntarily and knowingly entered into, based on a claim that it was made without legal representation. To the contrary, we find that appellant received competent legal advice and chose to disregard it. Based on the authority of Stano v. State, 520 So. 2d 278 (Fla.1988) and Golden v. State, 509 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), we reject appellant’s second contention as without merit.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wilson v. State, 567 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Quarterman v. State, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla.1988); Valdes v. State, 557 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990); Bohannon v. State, 546 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), rev. denied, 557 So. 2d 35 (Fla.1990).…
-
Valdes v. State, 746 So. 2d 589 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Valdes v. State, 557 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), rev. denied, 576 So. 2d 294 (Fla.1990).…
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Mullins, 527 So. 2d 1380 (Fla. 1988)
- Stano v. State, 520 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 1988)
- Golden v. State, 509 So. 2d 1149 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)