Tannihill v. State, s. 89-0075 and 89-0127
| Decision Date | 24 January 1990 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 89-0075 and 89-0127,s. 89-0075 and 89-0127 |
| Parties | 15 Fla. L. Weekly D1196, 15 Fla. L. Weekly D238 Vincent TANNIHILL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Patrick C. Rastatter of Glass & Rastatter, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and David S. Morgan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Daytona Beach, for appellee.
The defendant set forth in his appellate brief that he pleaded nolo contendere to second degree murder, reserving his right to appeal the trial court's finding that he was competent to stand trial. The state's brief agreed that the above is what took place and the judge stated at the end of the hearing that the defendant had a right to appeal. All of them were wrong. On the record, the defendant clearly pled guilty, and therefore, has no right to appeal. However, the defendant can seek collateral relief. Kiriluk v. State, 440 So.2d 520 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). This does not, however, automatically mean that he may relitigate the question of his competency to stand trial, a matter resolved before any guilty plea was entered.
We, therefore, have no jurisdiction and this appeal is dismissed.
DISMISSED.
POLEN, J., and KANAREK, PAUL B., Associate Judge, concur.
The prior opinion issued on January 24, 1990, shall continue in full force and effect. In addition:
1. The judgment and sentence does not conform to the oral pronouncement in open court. The state concedes that the latter controls. Gonzales v. State, 488 So.2d 610 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). The judgment and sentence must be corrected.
2. The state also concedes that attempted armed robbery is only a second degree felony. Williams v. State, 537 So.2d 195 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Accordingly, the maximum period of imprisonment is fifteen years.
This cause is, therefore,
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS IN ACCORDANCE HEREWITH.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Tory v. State, 94-2085
...of judgment and sentence, the latter prevails. See Walls v. State, 596 So.2d 811, 812 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Tannihill v. State, 559 So.2d 608, 609 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Moreover, an oral pronouncement will most certainly prevail where the state concedes that the written sentence was in error.......
-
Jones v. State, 92-1150
...E.g., Newberry v. State, 616 So.2d 1093 (Fla. 4th DCA1993); McBee v. State, 581 So.2d 1009 (Fla. 4th DCA1991); Tannihill v. State, 559 So.2d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA1990). It is unclear whether the trial court intended to impose habitual felony offender status for each and every count or as to Cou......
-
McMullen v. State, 93-2830
...at a resentencing required by reversal of an original sentence. Bruno v. State, 596 So.2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Tannihill v. State, 559 So.2d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Pahud v. State, 370 So.2d 66 (Fla. 4th DCA We find no other errors in the sentence. REVERSED AND REMANDED. HERSEY, WARNE......
-
Green v. State, 92-0186
...4th DCA 1982). On remand, we instruct the trial court to conform the written sentences to its oral pronouncements. Tannihill v. State, 559 So.2d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND GUNTHER and STONE, JJ., and OWEN, WILLIAM C., Jr., Senior Judge, concur. ...