Barthel v. State
| Decision Date | 19 September 2003 |
| Docket Number | No. 2D03-1728.,2D03-1728. |
| Parties | Richard BARTHEL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard Barthel appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm without discussion the trial court's order as to Barthel's first three claims, but we reverse and remand as to his last claim.
Barthel entered a negotiated plea of guilty to ten heroin-related offenses. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent sentences of ten years in prison on all ten counts and imposed a three-year minimum mandatory sentence on six of the ten counts. In his motion, Barthel claimed that the three-year minimum mandatory sentences are illegal based on this court's opinion in Taylor v. State, 818 So.2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA), review dismissed, 821 So.2d 302 (Fla.2002) (). He further alleged that his counsel was ineffective for failing to object to the imposition of the illegal minimum mandatory terms and asked that his conviction and sentence be vacated.
The trial court concluded that Barthel's counsel was not ineffective for failing to challenge the minimum mandatory terms because the legislature had retroactively reenacted the amendments held unconstitutional in Taylor, thus curing the single-subject violation. However, prior to the trial court's denial of Barthel's motion for postconviction relief, this court held the legislature's retroactive reenactment of the provisions of chapter 99-188 to be invalid. Green v. State, 839 So.2d 748 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Thus, even though the trial court may have been correct in its determination that trial counsel was not ineffective, Barthel's minimum mandatory sentences are illegal and the trial court erred by denying relief. An illegal sentence cannot be imposed pursuant to a negotiated plea and an illegal sentence is subject to correction at any time, including collaterally. See Bruno v. State, 837 So.2d 521 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
.
Barthel is not entitled to automatic resentencing, however, because his sentences were the result of a negotiated plea in which the State agreed to reduce the original charges. On remand, the State must be given the option to either agree to a resentencing in accordance with Taylor or withdraw from the plea agreement and proceed to trial on the original charges. Bruno, 837 So.2d at 523.
As we did in Green, we certify conflict with Carlson v. State, 27 Fla. L. Weekly D2162, ___ So.2d ___, 2002 WL 31202145 (Fla. 5th DCA Oct.4, 2002), Lecorn v. State, 832...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Rodriguez v. State, 2D02-4416.
...for this charge or (2) withdrawing from the plea agreement and proceeding to trial on the original charges. See Barthel v. State, 862 So.2d 28, 29 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003); see also Wallen v. State, 877 So.2d 737, 738 (Fla. 5th DCA Reversed and remanded. SALCINES and CANADY, JJ., Concur. 1. Rodri......
-
Wallen v. State
...a deadly weapon count or withdrawing from the plea agreement so that it may proceed to trial on all counts. See, e.g., Barthel v. State, 862 So.2d 28 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (holding where illegal sentence was imposed pursuant to plea bargain, state must be given option of either agreeing to res......
-
Almenares v. State, 5D04-730.
...on the original charges. See, Wallen v. State, 877 So.2d 737, 29 Fla. L. Weekly D1059 (Fla. 5th DCA April 30, 2004); Barthel v. State, 862 So.2d 28 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). We reverse the trial court's denial of Almenares' rule 3.800 motion and remand this matter to the trial court for further p......
-
Howard v. State
...for PRR sentencing). A court cannot impose an illegal sentence, even if it is agreed to as part of a negotiated plea. Barthel v. State, 862 So.2d 28, 29 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), see also Dominguez v. State, 98 So.3d 198, 199 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012) (stating that a defendant does not waive the right t......