WILLIAM VIRGO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Withheld Adjudication cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant was charged by information on April 12, 1993 with carrying a concealed firearm. He was referred to pretrial intervention from which he was terminated at the state’s election. As a consequence, he then entered a plea of nolo contendere for which he received withholding of adjudication, credit for time served, and forfeiture of the firearm. He is currently in deportation proceedings by the Immigration and Naturalization Service. On the assumption that he should have been either permitted to complete the pretrial intervention program or receive a meaningful hearing, he filed this petition for writ of error coram nobis which the trial judge dismissed. Since it is clear that a defendant may be subjected at the option of the state to pretrial intervention pursuant to section 948.08, Florida Statutes (1995), with one notable exception, the trial judge correctly observed that the state’s discretion is entirely non-reviewable. State v. Turner, 636 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994). Since this was the only matter before the trial judge, the order under review is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Batista v. State, 951 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…rida Supreme Court has recognized that a decision regarding admission to a PTI program is at the sole discretion of the state, is a prosecutorial function, and is non-reviewable. Cleveland v. State, 417 So. 2d 653, 653 (Fla.1982). In Virgo v. State, 675 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), the Third District held that termination from such a program is also non-reviewable. In State v. Rubel, 647 So. 2d 995 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), the Second District reversed a trial court’s dismissal of charges against a defendant aft…
-
State v. Simons, 22 So. 3d 734 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)…“public interest” warrants the withdrawal of a PTI offer. See Batista v. State, 951 So. 2d 1008, 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007) (finding “the statute explicitly recognizes the [S]tate’s discretion ... to admit [*739] or to terminate PTI”); Virgo v. State, 675 So. 2d 994 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) (finding the state has “non-reviewable” discretion to terminate a defendant’s PTI at any time, even after the program has begun); State v. Rubel, 647 So. 2d 995, 996 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (finding the state’s termination of a defenda…
-
State v. Higgins (Fla. 6th DCA 2025)
Authorities Cited
- State v. Turner, 636 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)