Jackson v. State, NN-168
| Citation | 382 So.2d 749 |
| Decision Date | 28 March 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. NN-168,NN-168 |
| Parties | Frank JACKSON, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Appellant asserts in his motion for rehearing or clarification that this court evidently overlooked Brown v. State, 376 So.2d 382 (Fla.1979), in which the Supreme Court of Florida ruled that a conditional nolo contendere plea (State v. Ashby, 245 So.2d 225 (Fla.1971)), is permissible only if the legal issue to be appealed is dispositive of the case, and that "as a matter of law a confession may not be considered dispositive of the case" (Brown, at 385) for purposes of an Ashby nolo plea.
The record presented to this court reveals a stipulation filed in the trial court in which both the State and the defense agreed that the State could not proceed with the prosecution of this case without the benefit of the confession as evidence. This court did not overlook Brown v. State, supra, but did consider it, and determined that the "dispositive effect" of a confession, as a matter of law, must be viewed in accordance with that decision. However, we do not consider that decision as precluding a stipulation, by the State and the defendant, such as we have in the record here, in which both sides agree that the State has no case and would be unable to proceed with the prosecution without the confession. Under these circumstances we concluded that the ruling on the admissibility of a confession would be "dispositive of the appeal". Having so considered it, we reviewed the appeal on the merits, and affirmed the ruling of the trial court.
Accordingly, the motion for rehearing and motion for rehearing en banc are denied.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hicks v. State
...dispositive unless the parties so stipulate") (quoting Wilson v. State , 885 So. 2d 959, 960 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) ); Jackson v. State , 382 So. 2d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (holding appellate court will treat appeal as involving a dispositive issue if the State stipulates to it).In the SYG con......
-
Finney v. State
...we are satisfied that a Nielsen type conflict exists. Consequently, we reach the merits of the present appeal. In Jackson v. State, 382 So.2d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), aff'd, 392 So.2d 1324 (Fla.1981), the court concluded that a stipulation by the parties that a case could not be prosecuted ......
-
Maxwell v. State, 5D04-4177.
...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 (Fla.2d DCA 1980); see also White v. State, 830 So.2d 9......
-
A.E.K. v. State
...returned the items he had stolen, they would not press charges.2 The parties apparently overlooked the impact of Jackson v. State, 382 So.2d 749 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), aff'd, 392 So.2d 1324 (Fla.1981), upon Brown v. State, 376 So.2d 382 (Fla.1979). In Jackson, the court concluded that a stipu......