CHARLES LOUIS BODDIE, 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.
Charles Boddie appealed his conviction for heroin possession after his motion to suppress evidence was denied and he entered a nolo contendere plea. The appellate court affirmed the judgment because the record did not show that the plea was entered with a reservation of the right to appeal, and Boddie failed to file a supplemental record demonstrating such a reservation after being given an opportunity to do so.
A nolo contendere plea entered without an express reservation of the right to appeal waives all grounds for appeal, including challenges to suppression motions. The court permitted Boddie to file a supplemental record showing a reservation but affirmed when he failed to do so.
[1] A plea of nolo contendere admits all well-pleaded facts and waives all formal defects in the pleadings that could have been raised by a plea of not guilty or a motion to…
[2] A reservation of the right to appeal must be reflected in the record for an appellate court to consider an appeal following a nolo contendere plea.
Previewing 2 of 4 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 nolo contendere plea admits all facts which are well pleaded and waives all formal defects in the pleadings of which the accused could have availed himself by a plea of not guilty or motion to quash.”
Establishes the legal effect of a nolo contendere plea in waiving appellate defenses
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBoddie was charged by information with possession of heroin. He filed a motion to suppress evidence, which was denied. After the denial, he entered a …
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 Reservation Of Right To Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, defendant in the trial court, was charged by information with possession of heroin. A defense motion to suppress the evidence was denied whereupon defendant entered a plea of nolo contend-ere. From the resulting judgment and sentence this appeal is taken.
Nothing in the record on appeal indicates that the plea of nolo contendere was entered with any reservation of the right to appeal. (See State v. Ashby, Sup.Ct. Fla.1971, 245 So. 2d 225; Rule 3.6, subd. b, FAR and Rule 3.7, subd. f(3), FAR).
A nolo contendere plea admits all facts which are well pleaded and waives all formal defects in the pleadings of which the accused could have availed himself by a plea of not guilty or motion to quash. (Peel v. State, Fla.App.2nd, 1963, 150 So. 2d 281 and Farrell v. State, Fla.App. 1st, 1975, 317 So. 2d 142). On December 10, 1975 appellant filed a motion for an extension of time “to allow the court reporter to transcribe proceedings which were not included in the original directions to the clerk, but are necessary for fair determination of the issues herein.” That motion was granted. A supplemental record has been filed but it too fails to reveal that the plea of nolo contendere was entered with any reservation of the right to appeal. The record does not reveal any attempt to supplement the record by stipulation between the parties as to whether or not there was any such reservation. Neither does there even appear in the record any affidavit of his attorney (see Beverly v. State, Fla.App. 1st, 1975, 322 So. 2d 597).
Accordingly, of the Court’s own motion, appellant is allowed to and until March 1, 1976, within which to file a supplemental record reflecting that his plea of nolo contendere was in fact conditioned on a reservation of right to appeal, failing so to do this Court will have no alternative but to affirm the judgment and sentence.
BOYER, C. J. and RAWLS and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur. Order of Affirmance
PER CURIAM.
Appellant having failed to file supplemental record as permitted by this Court’s per curiam opinion of February 20, 1976 and it appearing that the record fails to reflect that the appellant’s plea of nolo contendere was entered with any reservation of right to appeal any point of law, the judgment and sentence giving rise to this appeal are
AFFIRMED.
BOYER, C. J., and RAWLS and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Plowman v. State, 76 So. 3d 1105 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…owman argues that he did not waive this ineffective assistance of counsel claim by entering his plea. We agree. A plea waives certain defenses for purposes of direct appeal. Lacey v. State, 831 So. 2d 1267, 1271 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Boddie v. State, 328 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). However, a plea does not waive ineffective assistance of counsel claims regarding counsel’s failure to raise those defenses. See Skellie v. State, 849 So. 2d 1220, 1220 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (“Although [defendant] waived all defen…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Ashby, 245 So. 2d 225 (Fla. 1971)
- Peel v. State, 150 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Farrell v. State, 317 So. 2d 142 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
- Beverly v. State, 322 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)