Hall Approved Free Access to American Case Law
Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1989

Garland v. State

Garland v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided September 20, 1989 · Anstead, Hersey, Walden
550 So. 2d 82; 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2198; 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5087; 1989 WL 126498 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Garland v. State

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

HERSEY, C.J., and WALDEN, J., concur. ANSTEAD, J., dissents with opinion.

Dissenting Opinion

ANSTEAD, Judge,

dissenting.

I would reverse and remand for an evi-dentiary hearing. The transcripts of appellant’s plea proceedings reflect that there is at least an issue of fact as to whether appellant understood the consequences of his plea agreement, which resulted in the imposition of four (4) consecutive minimum mandatory sentences. Appellant’s prior motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 is no bar to his *83present claim. See Jolly v. State, 392 So.2d 54 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981).

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

↑