JORGE SUAREZ, 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.
In this Anders appeal, the Fifth District Court of Appeal affirmed Jorge Suarez's conviction and sentence, finding no preserved reversible error on the face of the record. However, the court identified a potential unpreserved double jeopardy violation arising from the trial court's resentencing after Suarez failed to report to begin serving his sentence, and permitted him to raise this issue in a timely motion for postconviction relief.
The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, finding no preserved reversible error apparent on the face of the record. However, the court acknowledged that an unpreserved double jeopardy violation may exist depending on the terms of the plea agreement, and permitted Suarez to raise this issue in a timely motion for postconviction relief.
[1] An unpreserved double jeopardy violation may exist when a defendant fails to report to begin serving a sentence and is subsequently resentenced to a longer term.
[2] A double jeopardy violation may occur when a court increases a sentence after the defendant violates a furlough agreement by failing to report to begin sentence.
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“it appears that an unpreserved double jeopardy violation may exist”
The court identifies the potential constitutional issue despite lack of preservation, suggesting it may be pursued through postconviction relief.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSuarez was sentenced to a three-year minimum mandatory term on November 21, 2002, pursuant to a plea agreement with the State. The agreement apparentl…
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 Anders Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, J.
In this Anders1 appeal, our examination of the record and the briefs filed by Jorge Suarez and his counsel, demonstrate no preserved reversible error apparent on the face of the record. See State v. Causey, 503 So. 2d 321 (Fla.1987). However, it appears that an unpreserved double jeopardy violation may exist.
Suarez was sentenced to a three-year minimum mandatory term on November 21, 2002, pursuant to a plea agreement with the State. Apparently, it was agreed that he would not have to report to begin serving his sentence until November 27, 2002. Suarez failed to report as required, and, following his arrest several days later, the trial court set aside his sentence and resentenced him to thirty-eight months in prison, with a three-year minimum mandatory term. This may or may not be a double jeopardy violation, depending on the terms of the plea agreement. See, e.g., Ingraham v. State, 842 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (holding that jeopardy attached when the court imposed defendant’s sentence orally at the plea hearing and a double jeopardy violation occurred when the court increased the sentence after the defendant violated a furlough agreement by failing to report to begin sentence); cf. Metellus v. State, 817 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) (holding that no double jeopardy violation occurred after defendant was resentenced on motion of the State pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170 after defendant failed to comply with plea agreement). Nonetheless, this issue was not preserved for appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction and sentence without prejudice to raise the matter in a timely motion for postconviction relief.
AFFIRMED.
GRIFFIN and PALMER, JJ., concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- State v. Causey, 503 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 1987)
- Wilfrid Metellus v. State, 817 So. 2d 1009 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Ingraham v. State, 842 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)