STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
ESTEVAN FIGUEROA, 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 State of Florida appealed a trial court's sentencing order that imposed probation with withheld adjudication after the court advised the defendant of the sentence it would impose if he pleaded guilty. The Fourth District Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, holding that the State lacks statutory authority to appeal a final sentencing order that, while legally imposed, results from a plea agreement negotiated between the trial court and defendant.
The State does not have the right to appeal such an order. The court dismissed the appeal, holding that Florida Statute section 924.07 and Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c) do not authorize the State to appeal when a trial court enters into its own plea agreement with a defendant, even if the resulting sentence is technically legal.
[1] The state does not have the right to appeal a final sentencing order entered over its objection after the trial court advised the defendant of its willingness to withhold…
[2] A claim of procedural error in the entry of a disposition order does not render the disposition illegal for purposes of a state appeal.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the state does not have the right to appeal such an order”
The court's direct holding dismissing the State's appeal of a plea agreement-based sentence
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe trial court advised defendant Estevan Figueroa that if he pleaded guilty to the charges, the court would withhold adjudication of guilt and place …
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 Downward Departure Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The state appeals a final sentencing order imposing a legal sentence which was entered over the state’s objection after the trial court advised appellee, Estevan Figueroa, that if he pled to the crimes charged it would be willing to withhold adjudication of guilt and place him on probation. Appellee seeks dismissal of the appeal on the basis that the state does not have the right to appeal such an order. We agree.
The state, in support of its contention that it may appeal the order presently under review, argues that under the Fifth District Court of Appeal’s decision in State v. Gitto, 23 Fla. L. Weekly D1550, — So. 2d -, 1998 WL 335787 (Fla. 5th DCA June 26, 1998), the doctrine of separation of powers precludes the trial court from entering into a plea agreement with the defendant. Gitto is inapposite here because it does not discuss the issue of jurisdiction and a close reading of the opinion reveals that the district court had jurisdiction in that case because each of the consolidated cases involved the imposition of a downward departure sentence. The state was permitted to appeal under Florida Statute section 924.07(1)(i), (1995). As a note, in State v. Warner, 721 So. 2d 767, 769 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), this court “disagree[d] with Gitto to the extent that it holds that a court can never, over the state’s objection, advise a defendant of the sentence it would impose if the defendant pleads guilty to the charges filed by the state.”
In State v. F. G., 630 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993 ), aff'd, 638 So. 2d 515 (Fla.1994), the state appealed final disposition orders in juvenile delinquency cases arguing that claimed procedural errors leading up to the entry of the orders rendered the dispositions “illegal” for purposes of a state appeal under Florida Statute section 39.069(1)(b)(5), (1991). The district court held that the claim of such procedural error does not render the disposition illegal and, therefore, the appeals should be dismissed. The supreme court agreed and adopted the district court’s opinion.
Similarly, in State v. Riley, 648 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995), the third district dismissed an appeal by the state in which the state argued that the trial court rendered an illegal sentence when it refused to make habitual defender findings as required under section 775.084, Florida Statutes, (1993). The court held that, as in F. G., the procedural error does not make the sentence illegal under section 924.07(1)(e), Florida Stat utes, (1993). The trial court’s error did not fall within any provision under which the state can appeal.
Finally, in an appeal almost identical to the one at issue, the first district held that Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c) and section 924.07 do not authorize the state to appeal when the trial court enters into its own plea agreement with the defendant. See State v. Hewitt, 702 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997).
Appeal dismissed.
FARMER, SHAHOOD and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. McMAHON, 94 So. 3d 468 (Fla. 2012)…negotiation with McMahon, the State was not authorized to appeal the sentence resulting from that plea negotiation. McMahon, 47 So. 3d at 369. To support its conclusion, the Fourth District relied in part on its prior decision in State v. Figueroa, 728 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), which held that “a trial court’s initiation of plea discussions does not render an otherwise legal sentence ‘illegal’ for purposes of a state appeal” under section 924.07 or rule 9.140(c). McMahon, 47 So. 3d at 369 (citing Figue…
-
State v. Hewitt, 21 So. 3d 914 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009)…nce imposed on defendant is one which is within statutory limits and is therefore a legal sentence.... There is no basis for vacating the guidelines sentence, which is a legal and permissible one. Id. (citation omitted); see also State v. Figueroa, 728 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (State could not appeal a final sentencing order imposing a legal sentence). Although the trial court erred in not conducting a separate hearing or making findings, the sentence imposed was within the lowest permissible prison s…
-
State v. McMAHON, 47 So. 3d 368 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…ial court to initiate a plea discussion, neither Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(c) nor section 924.07, Florida Statutes (2009), authorizes the state to appeal court-initiated plea agreements. Further, this court held in State v. Figueroa, 728 So. 2d 787 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), that the state could not appeal a sentencing order imposing a legal sentence after the trial court advised the defendant that it would withhold adjudication of guilt and place the defendant on probation if the defendant pled gui…
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
- State v. Warner, 721 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)
- State v. F.G., 630 So. 2d 581 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
- State v. F.G., 638 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1994)
- State v. Hewitt, 702 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- State v. Riley, 648 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)