MANUEL BALBIN
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Manuel Balbin appeals the denial of his post-conviction motion challenging his sentence imposed after a probation violation. The Third District affirmed because Balbin's plea agreement explicitly stated he could receive a thirty-year sentence with a twenty-five-year mandatory minimum if he violated probation, and he had notice of these potential consequences.
The trial court properly imposed the sentence including the minimum mandatory penalty because Balbin had explicit notice through paragraph twenty of his plea agreement that he could receive such a sentence if he violated probation, and he was originally subject to the twenty-five-year mandatory minimum before entering the plea agreement.
[1] A defendant who was subject to a mandatory minimum sentence for an underlying conviction before entering into a plea agreement remains subject to that mandatory minimum i…
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“Because the Appellant had notice of the potential sentence for the crime underlying the grant of probation, the trial court could impose the sentence including the minimum mandatory for Appellant's subsequent probation violation.”
Establishes the court's holding that notice in the plea agreement of potential sentencing consequences for probation violation authorizes the trial court to impose those sentences.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBalbin entered into a second plea agreement that included paragraph twenty, which expressly provided that if he violated probation again, he could be …
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 Terms cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed May 29, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________ No. 3D21-1770 Lower Tribunal No. F05-31681A ________________
Manuel Balbin,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee. An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Lody Jean, Judge. Eric J. Cvelbar, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Linda Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before LOGUE, C.J., and MILLER and LOBREE, JJ. PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals the denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 post-conviction motion. Paragraph twenty of his second plea agreement expressly provided that if the trial court found he violated probation again, the Appellant could be sentenced to thirty years with a twenty-five year minimum mandatory sentence for the underlying conviction of attempted felony murder with a deadly weapon. Because the Appellant had notice of the potential sentence for the crime underlying the grant of probation, the trial court could impose the sentence including the minimum mandatory for Appellant's subsequent probation violation. See, e.g., Kelley
v. State, 309 So. 3d 306, 311 (Fla. 2d DCA 2020) (“Because [appellant] was
originally subject to the twenty-five-year mandatory minimum sentence before she entered into the plea agreement with the State, she was appropriately subject to it once her probation was revoked.”).
Affirmed.