Walker v. State, 93-3646
| Decision Date | 29 November 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 93-3646,93-3646 |
| Citation | 647 So.2d 262 |
| Parties | 19 Fla. L. Weekly D2527 Marquis D. WALKER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Angela L. Jacobs, Tallahassee, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., William J. Bakstran, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.
In this direct criminal appeal, appellant raises three issues: (1) whether the trial court erred when it denied his motion to withdraw his plea; (2) whether the sentence imposed is an illegal departure sentence; and (3) whether the trial court erred when it ordered the payment of restitution without determining whether he had the ability to pay.
We affirm the denial of appellant's motion to withdraw his plea. The motion was not presented until after sentence had been imposed, and appellant failed to establish that allowing him to withdraw his plea would correct a "manifest injustice." Williams v. State, 316 So.2d 267 (Fla.1975).
We reverse appellant's sentence to one year in county jail, followed by one year on community control and ten years on probation, and remand for resentencing. Subsequent to the imposition of appellant's sentence, the supreme court has held that imposition of any combination of county jail time, community control and incarceration when the sentencing guidelines call for a nonstate prison sanction results in a departure sentence, and requires that written reasons be given. State v. Davis, 630 So.2d 1059 (Fla.1994). It is apparent that the trial court was unaware that the sentence imposed constituted a departure and, therefore, did not provide any written reasons.
Finally, we conclude that we lack jurisdiction to address appellant's challenge to the trial court's order that he pay restitution. That order was made from the bench. However, it does not appear that it was ever reduced to writing and, thus, "rendered." Fla.R.App.P. 9.020(g). See Owens v. State, 579 So.2d 311 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Hart v. State, 516 So.2d 58 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987).
AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; and REMANDED, with directions.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Connor v. State
...Hobson v. State, 908 So.2d 1162, 1163 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); State v. Johnson, 892 So.2d 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005); Walker v. State, 647 So.2d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (concluding the district court lacks jurisdiction to review oral order that was made from the bench where order was never r......
-
Hobson v. State
...the propriety of the trial court's ruling on attorney's fees because the ruling was not reduced to writing. See Walker v. State, 647 So.2d 262, 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Gatlin v. State, 618 So.2d 765, 766 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); Owens v. State, 579 So.2d 311, 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 2. Section 316.02......
-
Peterson v. State, 98-02179.
...properly before this court. Although orally pronounced, the order to pay restitution was not reduced to writing. See Walker v. State, 647 So.2d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994). Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to Peterson timely seeking appellate review of the restitution issue subsequent t......