FRANKIE LEE ROGERS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse No Contest Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse and remand for vacation of the original judgment of conviction and sentence entered on November 1, 1994, and affirm in all other respects.
WARNER, POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur.
PER CURIAM.
We grant the motion for rehearing and clarify our original opinion.
We affirm the denial of appellant’s motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. However, we remand to the trial court to vacate on the record the original judgment and sentence entered in this cause on November 1, 1994. The appellant had moved to withdraw his original plea in this case by motion for postconviction relief filed in 1995, which the State stipulated to and the trial court agreed to. Thereafter, also pursuant to appellant’s agreement, the trial court then accepted a new plea of no contest to the charge and later sentenced appellant. Through ministerial oversight a written order of vacation of the original judgment and sentence was not entered by the trial court, even though the plea colloquy clearly shows what transpired. On remand, the trial court should enter an order vacating the original judgment and sentence pursuant to the rule 3.850 motion directed to the original plea and judgment.
WARNER, POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Commonwealth Land Title Ins. Co. v. Freeman, 884 So. 2d 164 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)…trial court in reality reversed its legal position by finding a breach of contract by Commonwealth. This is the type of judicial error that is not correctable on a rule 1.540 motion. Curbelo, 571 So. 2d at 444; Everett v. Fla. Transp. Servs., Inc., 744 So. 2d 1038, 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Bortz, 675 So. 2d at 624. We have considered whether the trial court may have had authority to grant relief from the judgment on its own motion pursuant to rule 1.540(a). That rule allows judges to correct errors in judgm…
-
Cottrell v. Taylor, 198 So. 3d 688 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016)…o applied to the property interests held by Mrs, Klump or Mr. Cottrell were not raised by the parties in the trial court or here. We express no opinion about those issues. . Taylor Bean asserts that Everett v. Florida Transportation Services, Inc., 744 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), supports its position. We disagree. Everett did not involve a plaintiff’s intentional decision to dismiss a case based on an inaccurate assumption; it involved an involuntary dismissal of the plaintiffs complaint upon motion by…
-
J.D. v. State, 849 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…Procedure Rules do not contain a corresponding provision to Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.140, but Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(b)(1) closely mirrors Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.140. See Everett v. Fla. Transp. Servs., Inc., 744 So. 2d 1038, 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)(this rule allows correction of a mistake of fact, but not a mistake of law or tactics; judicial error such as a mistaken view of the law is not subject to a correction under this rule.).…