R.C., A CHILD, 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.
Juvenile's appeal of delinquency adjudication is affirmed because he failed to preserve a competency issue by moving to withdraw his plea before appeal.
A competency issue in a juvenile delinquency case is not preserved for appeal absent a motion to withdraw the plea filed in the trial court.
[1] A competency determination in a juvenile delinquency proceeding is not preserved for appellate review unless the defendant moves to withdraw the plea in the trial court,…
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 intelligence“an issue is dispositive only when, regardless of the outcome of the appeal, there will be no trial; an order determining defendant competent has no such effect, as trial proceeds”
Explaining why a competency order is not dispositive under Fuller v. State
A juvenile entered a no contest plea to multiple charges and was adjudicated delinquent. A subsequent order recited that the juvenile had preserved th…
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 Dispositive Order cases and more on FLexlaw
A juvenile appeals an order adjudicating him delinquent after his plea of no contest to multiple charges. Although not requested at the plea or disposition hearing, a subsequent order recites that appellant had preserved the right to appeal the prior order finding him competent to proceed in all of his cases. It does not state that the order was dispositive. Indeed, an order finding a defendant competent to proceed is not a dispositive order. See Fuller v. State, 748 .So.2d 292, 294 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (an issue is dispositive only when, regardless of the outcome of the appeal, there will be no trial; an order determining defendant competent has no such effect, as trial proceeds). In Burns v. State, 884 So.2d 1010, 1012-13 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004), we explained that a competency issue relates to the voluntary and intelligent nature of a plea, which is among the limited issues which may be appealed from a plea, but not without moving to withdraw the plea first. We have applied this preservation rule to juvenile proceedings in P.R.T. v. State, 920 So.2d 708, 709 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006) citing State v. T.G., 800 So.2d 204, 210 (Fla.2001) (“[JJuveniles pleading guilty ... may directly appeal an involuntary plea only if it is preserved by a motion to withdraw plea in the trial court.”). As appellant failed to file a motion to withdraw his plea, he has not preserved the issue for review.
Affirmed.
WARNER, GROSS and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dortch v. State, 242 So. 3d 431 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)
-
LE Publ'ns, Inc. v. Kohl, 298 So. 3d 642 (Fla. 4th DCA 2020)
-
Gessner v. S. Co. & Gulf Power Co. (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)
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
- State v. T.G., 800 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 2001)
- Burns v. State, 884 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 2004)
- P.R.T. v. State, 920 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)