LUCAS A. SANCHEZ-DEL VALLE
v.
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER SERVICES, DIVISION OF LICENSING
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 Department did not err in revoking a security officer's license based on an Alford plea to felony and misdemeanor charges, as the plea creates a rebuttable presumption of guilt that mitigating circumstances do not overcome.
[1] An Alford plea, which permits a defendant to maintain a protestation of innocence while entering a guilty plea based on the defendant's intelligent conclusion that such 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 intelligence“a plea containing a protestation of innocence when . . . a defendant intelligently concludes that his interests require entry of a guilty plea and the record before the judge contains strong evidence of actual guilt.”
Definition of Alford plea from North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 37 (1970)
Sanchez-Del Valle entered an Alford plea to felony fleeing and eluding an officer and misdemeanor resisting an officer without violence, receiving a w…
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 Alford Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed September 4, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. ________________ No. 3D23-2064 Lower Tribunal Nos. CD202307061; D3216160 ________________ Lucas A. Sanchez-Del Valle, Appellant, vs. Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Licensing, Appellee. An Appeal from the State of Florida, Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Licensing. Coffey Burlington, P.L., and Jared W. Whaley, for appellant. Tobey Schultz, Senior Attorney (Tallahassee), for appellee. Before EMAS, LINDSEY and MILLER, JJ.
EMAS, J.
2
Lucas Sanchez-Del Valle appeals a final order of the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Licensing (the Department), which revoked his Security Officer’s License pursuant to Section 493.6118(2)(e), Florida Statutes (2023), following his plea to the felony crime of fleeing and eluding an officer and the misdemeanor crime of resisting an officer without violence, for which he received a withhold of adjudication and was placed on probation. Upon our hybrid review, see G.R. v. Agency for Persons. with Disabilities, 315 So. 3d 107, 108 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020) (“We review an agency's conclusions of law de novo and we review the record to determine whether competent substantial evidence supports the agency's decision.”), and affording no deference to agency interpretation of statutes or rules, see id., we affirm the order of revocation of appellant’s security officer’s license, finding the Department did not err in its consideration of the mitigating circumstances presented by Sanchez-Del Valle as it related to the rebuttable presumption of guilt arising from the plea. See North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 37 (1970) (recognizing an Alford plea as “a plea containing a protestation of innocence when . . . a defendant intelligently concludes that his interests require entry of a guilty plea and the record before the judge contains strong evidence of actual guilt.”) (emphasis added); Fla. R. Crim. P.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- The Fla. Bar. re Fla. Rules of Crim. Procedure, 343 So. 2d 1247 (Fla. 1977)
- Brown v. State, 943 So. 2d 899 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)
- A.C. C/O V.R. v. Agency for Health Care Admin., 315 So. 3d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020)
- T.J. v. State, 215 So. 3d 71 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)