RODOLFO ZAMORA, 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.
Zamora appealed his sentence after the trial court allowed the State to withdraw its plea offer and increase his sentence from 12 to 15 years. The court reversed, holding that jeopardy attaches upon acceptance of a plea, preventing the State from withdrawing the offer absent legal cause.
The trial court erred in allowing the State to withdraw its plea offer because jeopardy attaches once the court accepts a defendant's plea, and the plea may not be set aside without legal cause. The State's failure to properly investigate the prison credit issue does not constitute legal cause.
[1] Jeopardy attaches once a trial court accepts a defendant's plea.
[2] A trial court may not set aside an accepted plea without legal cause.
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 trial court erred in allowing the State to withdraw its plea offer because jeopardy attaches once a trial court accepts a defendant's plea.”
Establishes the core holding that acceptance of a plea triggers jeopardy protection preventing withdrawal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceZamora was charged with violating probation and entered into a plea agreement with the State for a 12-year sentence. The trial court accepted his plea…
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 Attachment Of Jeopardy cases and more on FLexlaw
WHATLEY, Acting Chief Judge.
In this appeal of his sentence, Rodolfo Zamora contends that his double jeopardy rights were violated when the trial court allowed the State to withdraw its plea offer after the court had accepted his plea and pronounced sentence. We reverse.
Zamora had been charged with violating his probation. Pursuant to a plea agreement between the State and defense, Zamora admitted his violation in exchange for a twelve-year prison sentence. The trial court conducted an appropriate plea colloquy and concluded by stating: “Accept his admission. Find that it’s freely and voluntarily entered. Revoke and adjudicate. Sentence him to 12 years Florida State Prison and give him credit for whatever time he served. You have 30 days in which to appeal the judgment and sentence of the Court.”
After this pronouncement, defense counsel cited the prison credit to which Zamora would be entitled. The State then asserted it would not have made the offer had it known the amount of credit for time served that Zamora would receive. After noting that it did not think defense counsel had been trying to mislead anyone, the trial court allowed the State to set aside the offer on the ground that it had been based upon a mistake. Over defense counsel’s objection, the trial court sentenced Zamora to fifteen years in prison with credit for time served.
The trial court erred in allowing the State to withdraw its plea offer because jeopardy attaches once a trial court accepts a defendant’s plea. See Brown v. State, 367 So. 2d 616, 620-621 (Fla.1979) (guilty plea); Jupin v. State, 664 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (nolo contendere plea). See also State ex rel. Wilhoit v. Wells, 356 So. 2d 817, 822 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (“[T]he court cannot accept such a plea [of guilty or nolo contendere], thus binding the accused, and then reject the plea over the defendant’s objection, either as a matter of discretion or on some ground insufficient for the rejection of a guilty plea that has been accepted.”). After acceptance of a plea, the trial court may not set aside that plea without legal cause. Jupin, 664 So. 2d at 1032. The State’s failure to properly investigate the issue of the amount of credit to which Zamora would be entitled does not constitute legal cause. Furthermore, it is not incumbent upon defense counsel to provide the State with this information. If the State were uncertain, an inquiry could have been made before the plea offer was made.
The State’s reliance on Farber v. State, 409 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), is misplaced because there is no indication that case involved the acceptance of a plea, at which point jeopardy attaches.
Accordingly, we reverse Zamora’s sentence and remand with directions that the trial court resentence Zamora in accordance with the accepted plea to twelve years with credit for time served.
Reversed and remanded for resentencing.
NORTHCUTT and DAVIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Joslin v. State, 826 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…may not set the plea aside over the defendant’s objection without legal cause, and the defendant is protected from ever being tried for the offenses covered in the accepted plea. Pettis v. State, 803 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Zamora v. State, 737 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). Jeopardy also attaches when a court imposes a sentence, after which the double jeopardy clauses protect the defendant from receiving a punishment greater than the sentence already imposed. See Troupe v. Rowe, 283 So. 2d 857, 860…
-
Pettis v. State, 803 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…the court unconditionally accepted appellant’s plea. Once the court had accepted the plea, it was binding and could only be set aside or withdrawn over defense objection for legal cause. See State ex rel. Wilhoit, 356 So. 2d at 822; Zamora v. State, 737 So. 2d 1165 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Jupin v. State, 664 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). We agree with appellant that no legal cause was demonstrated for setting aside the plea in that the judge had found the plea voluntarily entered in accordance with rule 3.172(c)…
-
Cortez Smalls v. State, 144 So. 3d 656 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…s plea.” The trial court denied this motion, determining that the previous plea had been properly set aside. We disagree. First, we note that Smalls is correct that “jeopardy attaches once a trial court accepts a defendant’s plea.” Zamora v. State, 737 So. 2d 1165, 1166 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). And “[a]fter acceptance of a plea, the trial court may not set aside that plea without legal cause.” Id. (emphasis added).1 Here, it is clear from the record that Smalls’ first plea was accepted by the trial court. Therefo…
Authorities Cited
- Brown v. State, 367 So. 2d 616 (Fla. 1979)
- State ex rel. William M. C. Wilhoit v. Wells, 356 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
- Farber v. State, 409 So. 2d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Jeorgie Jupin v. State, 664 So. 2d 1031 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)