JAMES CHARLES MOORE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1991-01-14
No. 89-02088
586 So. 2d 64 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1991) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Topics
Dispositive Issue Reservation Of Right To Appeal Nolo Contendere Plea

Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dispositive Issue cases and more on FLexlaw

Opinion of the Court

The state has filed a motion to dismiss the present appeal because the appellant pleaded nolo contendere to the offenses without reserving the right to appeal a dispositive issue. See Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382 (Fla.1979). The record reveals that appellant pleaded and reserved the right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress, but the trial court failed to determine whether the motion to suppress was dispositive. It appears that the trial court’s omission was partially induced by the appellant’s indecision on whether to plead to the charges or opt for a bench trial. Nevertheless, the trial court is obligated to determine whether the issue reserved for appeal is dispositive. Everett v. State, 535 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

Consistent with the principles emphasized in Everett, we deny the motion to dismiss and relinquish jurisdiction to the trial court for thirty days to determine whether the motion to suppress, reserved for appeal, is dispositive of appellant’s case. Appellant shall immediately notify this court of the disposition by filing either a transcript of any proceedings or a certified order.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • State v. Calloway, 589 So. 2d 326 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)
    …for the purpose of prostitution is facially constitutional) with Johnson v. Carson, 569 F.Supp. 974 (M.D.Fla.1983) (municipal ordinance prohibiting loitering for the purpose of prostitution is facially unconstitutional). See also Holliday v. Tampa, 586 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (following Wyche and upholding as facially constitutional a municipal ordinance prohibiting loitering for the purpose of selling drugs and certifying the constitutionality of that ordinance to the supreme court).…
  • Holliday v. City OF Tampa, 619 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 1993)
    …BARKETT, Chief Justice. We have for review Holliday v. City of Tampa, 586 So. 2d 64, 65 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991), in which the district court denied certiorari review, but certified the following question to this Court as one of great public importance: Is section 24-43, City of Tampa Code (1989), facially constitutional? We have juris…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw