Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2002

Doyle v. State

Doyle v. State
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided February 13, 2002 · Farmer, Klein, Stevenson
807 So. 2d 176; 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 1410; 2002 WL 216427 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Doyle v. State

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the order summarily denying Appellant’s motion for postconviction relief, seeking to vacate his conviction based on the alleged involuntariness of his plea. See Stretcher v. State, 803 So.2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). As we did in Stretcher, we certify as a question of great public importance the same question certified in Major v. State, 790 So.2d 550, 552 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001):

WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT OR COUNSEL HAVE A DUTY TO ADVISE A DEFENDANT THAT HIS PLEA IN A PENDING CASE MAY HAVE SENTENCE ENHANCING CONSEQUENCES IF THE DEFENDANT COMMITS A NEW CRIME IN THE FUTURE?
FARMER, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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