Campbell v. State, 83-215

Decision Date02 August 1984
Docket NumberNo. 83-215,83-215
PartiesHarvey Eugene CAMPBELL, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

Kenneth J. Cotter, Cotter & Small, P.A., Orlando, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Evelyn D. Golden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.

ORFINGER, Judge.

Defendant appeals from a judgment of conviction following a guilty plea to a charge of trafficking in cannabis in violation of section 893.135(1)(a), Florida Statutes (1981), and from the imposition of the three-year minimum sentence required by that statute.

Defendant contends that the State was bound to honor the agreement on which the guilty plea was based that it would move the court to mitigate defendant's sentence pursuant to section 893.135(3), 1 in return for defendant's substantial assistance in making at least two drug busts with a specified minimum dollar value. When the State refused to make such motion on the ground that defendant had not rendered substantial assistance, defendant moved to enforce the agreement, or alternatively, that he be allowed to withdraw his plea. After denying relief to defendant, the trial court adjudicated him guilty and imposed the sentence. We reverse.

It is clear from the record that the drug cases the State wanted defendant to help with had nothing to do with the criminal activity for which the defendant was charged. Defendant was not asked to, nor did the plea bargain encompass any agreement to provide substantial assistance in the identification, arrest or conviction of any of his "accomplices, accessories, co-conspirators, or principals" with regard to the crime for which he was charged. Instead, he was requested to become an informant with regard to crimes as yet undetected (and perhaps even uncommitted), and help the police make new cases.

However laudable and commendable that objective may be, the legislature has not given the State the right to make such a plea bargain, nor has it given the trial court the power to mitigate the three-year mandatory sentence based upon such bargain. The statutory language is clear. The court may mitigate the three-year minimum sentence only when the State represents that defendant has rendered substantial assistance in the apprehension of others involved in the very crime for which defendant is charged (his accomplices, accessories, co-conspirators, or principals). Any other interpretation of the clear language of the statute would be a judicial invasion of the prerogatives of the legislature to determine applicable sentences for given crimes.

The nature of the "substantial assistance" was not...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • Webster v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • October 14, 2020
    ...v. Cooke, 562 U.S. 216, 219 (2011) (internal quotation marks and citations omitted). 15. Petitioner relies on Campbell v. State, 453 So. 2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), which the Fifth DCA decided three years before Soto. In Campbell, the court ruled that § 893.135 did not permit a sentence red......
  • Madrigal v. State, 87-1226
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • June 6, 1989
    ...in the narcotics case with which he is charged. On this basis, Noon v. State, 480 So.2d 668 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985) and Campbell v. State, 453 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) specifically held that an agreement for waiver of the mandatory sentence in exchange for cooperation in a non -narcotics c......
  • Lusby v. State, 85-1850
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • February 18, 1987
    ...helped the police make a new case. Thus it would not constitute substantial assistance under Fla. Stat. 893.135(3), see Campbell v. State, 453 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). However, that fact does not compel a discharge of the appellant. State v. Stella, 454 So.2d 780 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).2......
  • Mack v. State, BK-435
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • October 2, 1986
    ...remedy would be the withdrawal of his plea of guilty and a reinstatement of his earlier not guilty plea. Compare Campbell v. State, 453 So.2d 525 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (held that trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to withdraw guilty plea negotiated under erroneous interpretation ......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT