Sharpe v. State, 91-1712
| Decision Date | 19 November 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 91-1712,91-1712 |
| Parties | Bauldy A. SHARPE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. 589 So.2d 964, 16 Fla. L. Week. D2920 |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Valerie Jonas, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and Angelica D. Zayas, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and NESBITT and COPE, JJ.
The denial of a motion to disclose the identity of a confidential informant, which was arguably sought to be preserved for appellate review by the appellant's nolo plea, is not a dispositive order. The appeal is therefore dismissed, Roob v. State, 572 So.2d 1022 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991), without prejudice to an application for withdrawal of the plea. Roob, 572 So.2d at 1023; cf. Gibson v. State, 386 So.2d 588 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) ().
Appeal dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Werner v. State, 3D02-965.
...to the defendant's right to withdraw the plea and for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Roob v. State, 572 So.2d 1022 (Fla. 3d DCA Appeal dismissed. ...
-
Seabrook v. State, 92-413
...without the confidential informant's testimony. Therefore, the issue was not preserved for appellate review. See Sharpe v. State, 589 So.2d 964 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Everett v. State, 535 So.2d 667 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988); D.K.G. v. State, 460 So.2d 549 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Accordingly, this appea......