MARQUIS D. WALKER, 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.
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to withdraw the plea, reversed the sentence due to an unstated departure, and lacked jurisdiction to review the restitution order.
Appellant was convicted and sentenced, then appealed raising issues regarding his plea, sentence, and restitution. The motion to withdraw the plea was…
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 Departure Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this direct criminal appeal, appellant raises three issues: (1) whether the trial court erred when it denied his motion to withdraw his plea; (2) whether the sentence imposed is an illegal departure sentence; and (3) whether the trial court erred when it ordered the payment of restitution without determining whether he had the ability to pay.
We affirm the denial of appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea. The motion was not presented until after sentence had been imposed, and appellant failed to establish that allowing him to withdraw his plea would correct a “manifest injustice.” Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975).
We reverse appellant’s sentence to one year in county jail, followed by one year on community control and ten years on probation, and remand for resentencing. Subsequent to the imposition of appellant’s sentence, the supreme court has held that imposition of any combination of county jail time, community control and incarceration when the sentencing guidelines call for a nonstate prison sanction results in a departure sentence, and requires that written reasons be given. State v. Davis, 630 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1994). It is apparent that the trial court was unaware that the sentence imposed constituted a departure and, therefore, did not provide any written reasons.
Finally, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction to address appellant’s challenge to the trial court’s order that he pay restitution. That order was made from the bench. However, it does not appear that it was ever reduced to writing and, thus, “rendered.” Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g). See Owens v. State, 579 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Hart v. State, 516 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.
WOLF, WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jefferey Hobson v. State, 908 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…BSTER and DAVIS, JJ., concur; THOMAS, J., concurs in result only. . We note that we are without jurisdiction to address the propriety of the trial court’s ruling on attorney's fees because the ruling was not reduced to writing. See Walker v. State, 647 So. 2d 262, 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Gatlin v. State, 618 So. 2d 765, 766 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Owens v. State, 579 So. 2d 311, 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). . Section 316.027 requires a driver involved in a crash resulting in injury or death to immediately stop at…
-
Connor v. State, 944 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…f its right to appeal6 [*492] because an order not reduced to writing is not a final order subject to review. See Hobson v. State, 908 So. 2d 1162, 1163 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); State v. Johnson, 892 So. 2d 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Walker v. State, 647 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (concluding the district court lacks jurisdiction to review oral order that was made from the bench where order was never reduced to writing and thus not “rendered”); Gatlin v. State, 618 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); McClinton…
-
Peterson v. State, 731 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)…rm. The only issue presented by Peterson— a challenge to the trial court’s order that he pay restitution — is not properly before this court. Although orally pronounced, the order to pay restitution was not reduced to writing. See Walker v. State, 647 So. 2d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to Peterson timely seeking appellate review of the restitution issue subsequent to the rendition of a restitution order. ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and NORTHCUTT, J., Concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1975)
- State v. Davis, 630 So. 2d 1059 (Fla. 1994)
- Petithomme v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 579 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Bauzela v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 579 So. 2d 311 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Jaquelyn Frances Hart v. State, 516 So. 2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)