From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Allen v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Sep 16, 1994
642 So. 2d 815 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

Summary

holding that a defendant was not permitted to object to the illegality of a sentence requiring him to reimburse a sheriffs department for $16.95 in medical expenses because he had agreed to pay those expenses in a plea bargain

Summary of this case from Costin v. State

Opinion

No. 94-1270.

September 16, 1994.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Columbia County, Paul Bryan, J.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, P. Douglas Brinkmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Patrick Martin, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, for appellee.


Cody Allen appeals that portion of his judgment and sentence imposing a condition of probation requiring him to reimburse the Columbia County Sheriff's Department for medical expenses in the amount of $16.95. Mr. Allen seeks reversal of the restitution order under the authority of Comeau v. State, 611 So.2d 68 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992), in which this court held that the county had a duty to provide medical care to a prisoner in its custody and reversed an order imposing an obligation to reimburse the sheriff's office for medical care as a condition of probation. Although the defendant in Comeau pleaded guilty pursuant to a negotiated plea, id., that case is distinguishable from the instant case because Comeau did not agree to reimburse the cost of medical care as a part of the plea agreement. Here, in contrast, Mr. Allen's plea bargain included, as a specific component, the obligation to reimburse the sheriff's office for these medical costs. Mr. Allen bargained for this obligation and thereby waived any objection to the legality of a sentence containing this condition of probation. Having accepted the benefits of his plea bargain, Mr. Allen will not be relieved of his burdens under the contract. See Novaton v. State, 634 So.2d 607, 608 (Fla. 1994); see also Mann v. State, 622 So.2d 595, 596-97 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (affirming summary denial of Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 motion, court held that appellant would be bound by terms of plea contracts entered into after extensive negotiations as to both guilt and sentence).

AFFIRMED.

ALLEN and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Allen v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Sep 16, 1994
642 So. 2d 815 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

holding that a defendant was not permitted to object to the illegality of a sentence requiring him to reimburse a sheriffs department for $16.95 in medical expenses because he had agreed to pay those expenses in a plea bargain

Summary of this case from Costin v. State
Case details for

Allen v. State

Case Details

Full title:CODY ALLEN, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Sep 16, 1994

Citations

642 So. 2d 815 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

Citing Cases

Kingry v. State

Rather, it is controlled by cases such as Ackermann v. State, 962 So.2d 407, 408 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007) (stating…

Carson v. State

In the State's response to our show cause order, it correctly cited this court's case law holding that a…