Freeman v. State, 82-1606

CourtCourt of Appeal of Florida (US)
Citation450 So.2d 301
PartiesCraig Eugene FREEMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 82-1606,82-1606
Decision Date17 May 1984

Page 301

450 So.2d 301
Craig Eugene FREEMAN, Appellant,
STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 82-1606.
District Court of Appeal of Florida,
Fifth District.
May 17, 1984.

Page 302

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Larry B. Henderson, Asst. Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard B. Martell, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.


Appellant Craig Eugene Freeman pleaded nolo contendere to the offenses of burglary of a structure and resisting an officer without violence expressly reserving his right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress his confession. There was no finding by the court that the suppression issue was dispositive of the case.

In Brown v. State, 376 So.2d 382 (Fla.1979), the Florida Supreme Court held that a defendant could take an appeal from a judgment entered upon a conditional plea of nolo contendere only when the reserved issue was legally dispositive of the case. In the course of its opinion, the court stated:

We must now ascertain what constitutes a dispositive legal issue. In most cases the determination will be a simple one. Motions testing the sufficiency of the charging document, the constitutionality of a controlling statute, or the suppression of contraband for which a defendant is charged with possession are illustrative. This case, however, presents us with one of the truly inscrutable areas--confessions. In order to determine accurately whether a confession is dispositive of a case, the prosecution would have to present to the trial judge all of the evidence it intended to introduce at trial. The judge would then have to decide on the basis of hearsay and summarized information, whether there was sufficient evidence apart from the confession to support a conviction. Such a procedure would be unwieldy and time-consuming. Therefore, in order to avoid a mini-trial on the sufficiency of the evidence in each case involving a confession, we hold that as a matter of law a confession may not be considered dispositive of the case for purposes of an Ashby nolo plea. (footnote omitted; emphasis added)

376 So.2d at 385.

In the instant case, counsel announced that Freeman would withdraw his not guilty plea and enter a plea of no contest "specifically reserving the right to appeal the denial of a motion to suppress a confession, which we filed dated June 9, 1982." Following a recap of the grounds of the motion, the following colloquy occurred:

[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: We would, we feel that the state's version of the facts, which I presume will be given in a few minutes, do not substantiate, or would not substantiate a guilty plea or guilty verdict in either one of these charges, and the confession, we filed and sent the motion to suppress the confession, that being denied--in other words, if it had been granted, we feel as if the state would not have been able to bear the burden of proof they need to bear to get a conviction in these cases.

We do enter a plea of no contest, reserving the right to appeal that denial.

Page 303

THE COURT: Would that be acceptable to the state under all the circumstances?

[PROSECUTOR]: Yes, Your Honor.

THE COURT: Whether or not that would be dispositive of the case, like I said, that's up to the Fifth District Court of Appeals.

Of course not stipulating or agreeing it is fully dispositive of that case.

The state possibly could still go forward to a jury trial even without the admission or confessions of Craig Freeman.

Mr. Freeman, plead no contest here today, told your lawyer of course going to adjudicate you guilty, put a felony on your record and also a misdemeanor; Court's going to impose three years Department of Corrections on count one the burglary of a structure, and impose one year in the Orange County Jail, count two, resisting an officer without violence. These two sentences run concurrently, at the same time--however, they would run consecutive, in addition to any other sentence you might be serving, if you're serving any other sentence.

Do you fully understand that?

MR. FREEMAN: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: Is that what you want to do here today, give up your jury trial and plead no contest to the two charges?

MR. FREEMAN: Yes, sir.

THE COURT: Mr. Taylor, anything further you want to put on the record about that before we proceed?


To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Maxwell v. State, 5D04-4177.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • January 6, 2006
    ...4th DCA 2001); Blanco v. State, 752 So.2d 79 (Fla.2d DCA 2000); Spiker v. State, 477 So.2d 1063 (Fla.2d DCA 1985); Freeman v. State, 450 So.2d 301 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Jackson v. State, 382 So.2d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), aff'd, 392 So.2d 1324 (Fla.1981); Oesterle v. State, 382 So.2d 1293 (F......
  • Sanchez v. State, 4D12–1395.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • August 31, 2016
    ...officers following him, he drove down a dead end street, immediately stopped the vehicle, and darted out of the car); Freeman v. State, 450 So.2d 301 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984) (finding defendant acted suspiciously for the time and place and ran when approached by the officers, which added to reas......
  • State v. Goebel, 5D01-2158.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • January 25, 2002
    ...denied. See Bailey v. State, 717 So.2d 1096 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); State v. Vance, 692 So.2d 270 (Fla. 5th DCA 1997); Freeman v. State, 450 So.2d 301 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); State v. Jones, 417 So.2d 788 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). In this case the deputy saw Goebel within minutes of the robbery, drivi......
  • Spurlock v. Cycmanick, 91-29
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 20, 1991
    ...made by the prosecutor as being either an admission or stipulation that petitioner was not available for trial. Freeman v. State, 450 So.2d 301 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). See also Dick v. United States, 40 F.2d 609 (8th Cir.1930); Davidson v. State, 737 S.W.2d 942 (Tex.App.1987). These admissions......
  • 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