MARCO BASILISCO, 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.
A defendant's knowing waiver of procedural rights precludes relief for the trial court's failure to strictly follow habitual offender sentencing statutes.
Basilisco pled nolo contendere to grand theft auto and was sentenced as an habitual offender. He moved for post-conviction relief, alleging the trial …
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 Waiver Of Procedural Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Marco Basilisco has appealed from the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure. We affirm.
In March 1989, Basilisco pled nolo con-tendere to grand theft auto. He was sentenced to 5 years incarceration as an habitual offender. Basilisco thereafter filed the instant 3.850 motion, alleging that the trial court failed to make the findings required by sections 775.084(l)(a) and 775.084(3)(d), Florida Statutes (1989). The trial court summarily denied the motion, and attached a copy of the plea and sentencing transcript.
The classification of a defendant as an habitual offender without making the findings required by section 775.084(l)(a) is reversible error, even in the absence of objection. Rolle v. State, 586 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). The transcript attached by the trial court does not reflect that such findings were made herein. However, this court has held that “[a] defendant’s knowing waiver of the procedural rights accorded by section 775.084 [by entering into a plea agreement with knowledge that he was to be sentenced as a habitual felony offender] precludes any relief from the trial court’s failure to strictly follow the statute.” Caristi v. State, 578 So. 2d 769, 774 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
Because the initial review of the transcript herein did not appear to show that Basilisco agreed to habitual offender classification as a part of his plea agreement, this court requested a response from the Attorney General pursuant to Toler v. State, 493 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). After reviewing that response, and further study of the transcript, it is clear that Basilisco did indeed enter the plea with full knowledge that he was to be sentenced as a habitual felony offender as a part of his bargain. The motion herein was therefore correctly denied, and we affirm.
JOANOS, C.J., and SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Spriggs v. State, 615 So. 2d 828 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…e option to waive numerous substantive rights in the criminal justice area, [*832] even though waiver is not expressly provided by statute. 571 So. 2d at 71. Accord Greenlee v. State, 591 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991); see also Basilisco v. State, 593 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (defendant’s knowing waiver of section 775.084 procedural protections by plea agreement for HFO sentence precludes post-conviction relief alleging failure to follow the statutory requirements); Likely v. State, 583 So. 2d 414 (Fl…
-
Thad McGillery Brown v. State, 609 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)…0 So. 2d 516 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), and decided adversely tb the state’s position. Although neither party to this appeal has suggested a potential for conflict between the decision we reach here and this court’s prior decisions in Basilisco v. State, 593 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) and Jefferson v. State, 571 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990), we find it appropriate to provide a brief explanation of the reasons these decisions do not control the outcome of this case. At the outset, the instant case is a direct…
-
Marshall v. State, 623 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)…e legality of the sentence. 609 So. 2d at 732 [citations omitted]. In Brown, we distinguished the situation in which a defendant contests the illegality of his sentence after entering a plea bargain or nolo contendere plea from Basilisco v. State, 593 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 1st DCA1992), and Jefferson v. State, 571 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 1st DCA1990), cases in which the court found a defendant knowingly waived the procedural rights available under section 775.084 by entering into a plea agreement for an habitual offende…
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
- Toler v. State, 493 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Rolle v. State, 586 So. 2d 1293 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
- Caristi v. State, 578 So. 2d 769 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)