DON CIOETA, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Gain Time Forfeiture cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The order summarily denying appellant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion is reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on petitioner’s claim that the Department of Correction’s forfeiture of gain time has thwarted the intent of his negotiated plea agreement. See Hunt v. State, 922 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006); Garvin v. State, 884 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004). The trial court shall consider the appropriate remedy, specific performance or plea withdrawal, based on the circumstances of this case. See Cruz v. State, 976 So. 2d 695, 697 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008); Spencer v. State, 623 So. 2d 1211, 1213 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 266-67, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971) (Justice Douglas concurring specially). See also Mehl v. State, 958 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007); Hunt, 613 So. 2d at 898.
Reversed and Remanded.
WARNER, GROSS and DAMOORGIAN, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Santobello v. New York, 404 U.S. 257 (U.S. 1971)
- Spencer v. State, 623 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)
- Hunt v. State, 922 So. 2d 452 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Mehl v. State, 958 So. 2d 465 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)
- Cruz v. State, 976 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008)
- Garvin v. State, 884 So. 2d 470 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)