JOSE DEANGULO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
The court held that a defendant seeking to withdraw a plea based on an insufficient factual basis for one count must withdraw the entire plea, not just the challenged count.
[1] A defendant seeking post-conviction relief based on an insufficient factual basis for one count of a plea agreement must elect to withdraw the plea to all charges or none…
[2] Attempted trafficking in a controlled substance is a cognizable offense under Florida law.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant pleaded guilty to sale of cannabis and attempted trafficking in cannabis. He later sought post-conviction relief, arguing an insufficien…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 8.850 cases and more on FLexlaw
Affirmed.
(concurring).
Defendant-appellant Jose DeAngulo appeals an order denying a motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.850. I concur in the affirmance on the following analysis.
The defendant was charged in count one with sale of cannabis in violation of section 893.18, Florida Statutes (2007), and in count three, with attempted trafficking in cannabis, in violation of subparagraph 893.135(l)(a)l., Florida Statutes (2007). The defendant was sentenced pursuant to the plea agreement.
The defendant filed a timely rule 3.850 motion, arguing that there was an insufficient factual basis for count three. The defendant alleged that the amount of cannabis was twenty-two pounds, whereas under the trafficking statute, the minimum weight for a trafficking amount was twenty-five pounds. Id. The defendant asked the trial court to vacate count three only, but leave the remainder of the plea agreement in place. The trial court denied relief and the defendant has appealed.
In this situation, the defendant “must elect to either withdraw his plea to all charges or to none.” Quintana v. State, 917 So.2d 991, 992 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). Here the defendant did not request withdrawal of the entire plea, so the trial court reached the correct result in denying relief.
The defendant maintains that the court must grant relief because attempted trafficking is a non-existent offense. That is incorrect. As a statutory matter, the offense exists. See State v. Fernandez, 546 So.2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The substance of the claim is that there was no factual basis for that particular count.
Because the defendant did not seek to withdraw from the entire plea, the trial court reached the correct result in denying relief.
COPE, J.
(concurring).
Defendant-appellant Jose DeAngulo appeals an order denying a motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 8.850. I concur in the affirmance on the following analysis.
The defendant was charged in count one with sale of cannabis in violation of section 893.18, Florida Statutes (2007), and in count three, with attempted trafficking in cannabis, in violation of subparagraph 893.135(l)(a)l., Florida Statutes (2007). The defendant was sentenced pursuant to the plea agreement.
The defendant filed a timely rule 3.850 motion, arguing that there was an insufficient factual basis for count three. The defendant alleged that the amount of cannabis was twenty-two pounds, whereas under the trafficking statute, the minimum weight for a trafficking amount was twenty-five pounds. Id. The defendant asked the trial court to vacate count three only, but leave the remainder of the plea agreement in place. The trial court denied relief and the defendant has appealed.
In this situation, the defendant “must elect to either withdraw his plea to all charges or to none.” Quintana v. State, 917 So. 2d 991, 992 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). Here the defendant did not request withdrawal of the entire plea, so the trial court reached the correct result in denying relief.
The defendant maintains that the court must grant relief because attempted trafficking is a non-existent offense. That is incorrect. As a statutory matter, the offense exists. See State v. Fernandez, 546 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). The substance of the claim is that there was no factual basis for that particular count.
Because the defendant did not seek to withdraw from the entire plea, the trial court reached the correct result in denying relief.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- M.J. v. State, 546 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- State v. Davis, 546 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Quintana v. State, 917 So. 2d 991 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005)
- State v. Fernandez, 546 So. 2d 791 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)