ERICA BONITA BROWN, 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.
Court reversed conviction for home invasion robbery where defendant pleaded nolo contendere only to second-degree murder, holding that adjudication on an unpled charge constitutes fundamental reversible error.
A trial court commits fundamental reversible error by adjudicating a defendant guilty of an offense to which the defendant did not enter a plea.
[1] A trial court commits fundamental reversible error requiring no preservation when it adjudicates a defendant guilty of an offense to which the defendant did not enter a p…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceErica Brown entered a plea of nolo contendere only to second-degree murder, but the judgment included an adjudication for home invasion robbery to whi…
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 Home Invasion Robbery cases and more on FLexlaw
SALCINES, Judge.
Appellate counsel for Erica Brown has filed an Anders1 brief with this court. One of the possible issues raised by counsel was whether the trial court committed fundamental error by adjudicating Brown guilty of both second-degree murder and home invasion robbery. It is clear from the record that Brown entered a plea of nolo contendere only to the charge of second-degree murder. The judgment includes an adjudication for an offense to which she did not plead. This was fundamental reversible error to which no objection was required. See Cole v. State, 924 So. 2d 962, 963 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006).2 Accordingly, we reverse the adjudication for home invasion robbery and remand for the trial court to enter an amended judgment in accordance with the dictates of this opinion. The adjudication and sentence for second-degree murder is affirmed.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
DAVIS and LaROSE, JJ., Concur. . Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).
. If this had been only a sentencing error, the issue would not have been preserved. See Nunez v. State, 912 So. 2d 693, 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005) (holding unpreserved sentencing error, even if fundamental error, must be preserved through a timely filed Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800(b) motion).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Ladarius Brooks v. State, 199 So. 3d 974 (Fla. 4th DCA 2016)…s that the trial court sentenced Brooks on Count II when he entered a plea only as to Count I. It is fundamental error to sentence a defendant on all counts charged when he or she has not entered a plea as to each offense. See, e.g., Brown v. State, 960 So. 2d 905, 905 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (“The judgment includes an adjudication for an offense to which [the defendant] did not plead. This was fundamental reversible error..,.”). Therefore, the trial court erred by sentencing Brooks on Count II as well as Count I.…
-
Curtis v. State, 164 So. 3d 1256 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…g otherwise specifies that Curtis pleaded to grand theft motor vehicle or grand theft. Nonetheless, the judgment includes adjudication for the theft charges. “This was fundamental reversible error to which no objection was required.” Brown v. State, 960 So. 2d 905, 905 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). Accordingly, the convictions for grand theft motor vehicle and grand theft are reversed. The convictions for attempted murder, aggravated battery, and false imprisonment are affirmed. We remand for the trial court to enter…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Nunez v. State, 912 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 2005)
- Cole v. State, 924 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)