LEOTON R. SEARS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dispositive Ruling cases and more on FLexlaw
On Motion For Rehearing AND/OR CLARIFICATION
PER CURIAM.
We grant the appellant’s motion for rehearing, withdraw our prior opinion, and substitute the following in its place. Following the denial of his motion to suppress statements he made to police, Leoton Sears pled no contest to attempted robbery, a lesser included offense of the robbery charged, reserving his right to appeal the court’s ruling on the motion to suppress. A defendant’s right to appeal following a nolo contendere plea is, however, limited by Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(2)(A). Of significance in this cáse is the rule’s requirement that the ruling the defendant seeks to reserve for appeal be dispositive. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.140(b)(2)(A)®. The denial of Sears’ motion to suppress the statements he made to police was not dispositive. See Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382, 385 (Fla.1979); Werner v. State, 828 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002).
We thus affirm the instant appeal without prejudice to appellant’s right to seek to withdraw his plea. See Leonard v. State, 760 So. 2d 114, 119 (Fla.2000); Hagins v. State, 900 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005).
STEVENSON, C.J., WARNER and MAY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
M.N. v. State, 16 So. 3d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…he court held that district courts should not dismiss appeals from pleas upon a determination that they do not present a dispositive issue that was reserved for review but should summarily affirm such decisions.2 Id. at 119; see also Sears v. State, 920 So. 2d 709, 709 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (affirming judgment and sentence entered pursuant to plea based on determination that the court’s ruling on his motion to suppress was not dispositive). The supreme court has recognized that Leonard, applies to juvenile case…
-
Renard Nealie Williams v. State, 134 So. 3d 975 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…), quashed on other grounds, 620 So. 2d 1231 (Fla.1993). For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the appeal. M.N. v. State, 16 So. 3d 280 (Fla. [*977] 2d DCA 2009) (en banc) (citing Leonard v. State, 760 So. 2d 114, 118-19 (Fla.2000)); Sears v. State, 920 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) (on mot. for reh’g and/or clarification). AFFIRMED. WETHERELL and RAY, JJ., concur. BENTON, C.J., concurs "with opinion.…1 / 2
-
Ruilova v. State, 125 So. 3d 991 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…1280 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013). .See ch. 96-248, Laws of Fla. . See, e.g., White v. State, 661 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); Roob v. State, 572 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). . See, e.g., Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382, 385 (Fla.1979); Sears v. State, 920 So. 2d 709 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Sloss v. State, 917 So. 2d 941, 942 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005); Morgan v. State, 486 So. 2d 1356, 1359 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). . See, e.g., Teague v. State, 728 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999); White, 661 So. 2d 40.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Leonard v. State, 760 So. 2d 114 (Fla. 2000)
- Brown v. State, 376 So. 2d 382 (Fla. 1979)
- Orientus Werner v. State, 828 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Menelek Willis v. State, 828 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)
- Orlan Hagins v. State, 900 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)
- Hendrix v. State, 900 So. 2d 735 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)