Hadden v. State, s. 89-00518
| Decision Date | 12 January 1990 |
| Docket Number | 89-00519,Nos. 89-00518,s. 89-00518 |
| Citation | 555 So.2d 430 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
| Parties | ,193, 15 Fla. L. Weekly D193 Roy Lavon HADDEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
James Marion Moorman, Public Defender, and Stephen Krosschell, Asst. Public Defender, Bartow, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Katherine V. Blanco, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.
Hadden raises similar points in the direct appeals from a judgment and sentence for burglary entered on his guilty plea (Case No. 89-00518) and from the resulting violation of probation and sentence entered thereon (Case No. 89-00519). We, therefore, consolidate these two appeals.
The first point is that the combined sentences are in excess of the amount agreed to in a plea agreement. The agreement was for five and one-half years without bump-up for the violation of probation. The appellant actually received four years for the new burglary and three and one-half years for the violation of probation. However, the trial judge gave credit for two years previously served, making a total of five and one-half years to be served. There was no objection at sentencing, and thus no discussion as to further details of the agreement. We find this a classic case for the proposition that appellant must raise this point by a motion to withdraw the plea or a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion to vacate. See McGinty v. State, 463 So.2d 495 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985).
Hadden's second point in Case No. 89-00518, that he was not given notice of intent to impose costs and attorney's fees, has merit. We, therefore, vacate the portion of the sentence imposing costs and attorney's fees.
Hadden's second point in Case No. 89-00519 is that he did not receive sufficient credit for time served. Appellant may also raise this issue in a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion to vacate.
Costs and attorney's fees vacated, otherwise affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Reynolds v. State
...sentence, we hold that the issue is not cognizable on direct appeal. Murray v. State, 566 So.2d 30 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990); Hadden v. State, 555 So.2d 430 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1990); Duhart v. State, 548 So.2d 302 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal concerning the 5-year period of ......
-
Smith v. State, 91-1125
...and sentence are affirmed without prejudice to the filing of a motion in the trial court to withdraw the plea. See Hadden v. State, 555 So.2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). GOSHORN, C.J., and HARRIS, J., concur. ...
-
Fisher v. State, 91-808
...excess of the sentence agreed upon in the plea agreement. The procedural path chosen by Fisher is correct pursuant to Hadden v. State, 555 So.2d 430 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). The state agreed to nol-pros two of the three cases against Fisher in return for his entering a plea of nolo contendere to......