HOWELL D. FORREST, 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.
Howell Forrest appeals a five-year sentence imposed after he entered a negotiated nolo contendere plea expecting only 13 months imprisonment. The court vacates the sentence and remands because Forrest was denied the opportunity to withdraw his plea when the trial court disregarded the plea negotiations due to prior convictions discovered in the presentence investigation.
Forrest's sentence is vacated and remanded because he should have been given the opportunity to withdraw his plea. Although Forrest filed his motion to withdraw pro se while represented by counsel, the trial court should have considered the motion under the circumstances because Forrest was confused about his representation status after being advised that counsel would be appointed for his appeal.
[1] If a court does not concur in a tendered plea arising from negotiations, the defendant must be given the opportunity to withdraw the plea.
[2] A pro se motion filed by a defendant who is represented by counsel may be considered by the court under certain circumstances, particularly where the defendant demonstrat…
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unlock all legal intelligence“If the court does not concur in a tendered plea arising from negotiations, a plea may be withdrawn.”
Establishes the legal principle that a defendant may withdraw a negotiated plea when the court will not honor the plea agreement
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceForrest entered into plea negotiations with the State that included a stipulated sentence of 13 months incarceration. After sentencing, a Preliminary …
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 Pro Se Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PETERSON, J.
Howell D. Forrest appeals the imposition of a five year sentence without giving him the opportunity to withdraw his negotiated plea of nolo contendere, a plea he understood would incur only 13 months incarceration.
The record supports Forest’s allegations. The harsher sentence was imposed after a Preliminary Sentence Investigation revealed previous convictions that increased the scoresheet results and caused the trial court to disregard the negotiations between Forrest and the State. If the court does not concur in a tendered plea arising from negotiations, a plea may be withdrawn. See Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.172(g).
In order to contest the involuntariness of his plea, Rule 3.170, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure and Rule 9.140, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure require that Forrest must have preserved that right by filing a motion to withdraw his plea with the trial court within 30 days after sentencing. Forrest timely filed his motion to withdraw, but the State argues that he did this pro se while he was represented by an attorney; and therefore, the motion was a nullity. The State relies on Salser v. State, 582 So. 2d 12, 14 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991), to support its position. Salser, a pro se defendant, moved for a discharge based on violation of the speedy trial rule. This court declared that Salser could not file a motion pro se while represented by counsel and that if counsel failed to move, the defendant could seek post conviction relief for ineffective assistance of counsel.
Although Forrest did have trial counsel who had not been discharged at the time he filed his pro se motion, he was apparently confused and believed that he was without counsel for a period of time because he was advised at sentencing that the trial court would appoint counsel to file his appeal if he could not afford an attorney. Under the circumstances, we believe that Forrest’s motion should have been considered by the court.
Accordingly, we vacate Forrest’s sentence and remand to the trial court so that Forrest may be given the opportunity to withdraw his plea. We also note that the last scoresheet used by the court has previous crimes listed that have not been documented. Upon remand, Forrest should be given the opportunity to refute the prior convictions.
SENTENCE VACATED; REMANDED.