From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Levine v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 20, 2001
788 So. 2d 379 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Summary

explaining that “[a]n issue is legally dispositive only if, regardless of whether the appellate court affirms or reverses the lower court's decision, there will be no trial of the case”

Summary of this case from Garcia-Roque v. State

Opinion

Case No. 4D00-383.

Opinion filed June 20, 2001.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Stanley Goldstein, Judge; L.T. Case No. 98-24470 CF10A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Allen J. DeWeese, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Meredith L. Balo, Assistant Attorney General, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING


We withdraw our previously issued opinion and substitute the following in its place.

Appellant, Bryce Levine, appeals from his convictions, pursuant to a no contest plea, for felony driving while license suspended (DWLS) (habitual offender) and resisting arrest without violence. Appellant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss where one of the predicate prior convictions upon which the trial court relied in declaring him a habitual offender was uncounseled. We conclude that the issue was not dispositive. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal.

As to appellant's first point on appeal, the argument is not preserved because it was not dispositive of the case below. An issue is preserved for appeal on a guilty plea only if it is dispositive of the case. See Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(b)(2)(A); Zambuto v. State, 731 So.2d 46 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); see also Weber v. State, 492 So.2d 1166, 1167 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986). "An issue is legally dispositive `only if, regardless of whether the appellate court affirms or reverses the lower court's decision, there will be no trial of the case.'" Zambuto, 731 So.2d at 46 (quoting Vaughn v. State, 711 So.2d 64, 65 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)).

In this case, the issue was not dispositive. The issue of appellant's prior convictions was raised in a motion to dismiss. As the trial court observed at the hearing on the motion, appellant had several withholds upon which his habitualization could have been based even if the challenged predicate offense was uncounseled. This court in State v. Keirn, 720 So.2d 1085, 1090 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998), held that a withheld adjudication could be considered a "conviction" under section 322.34, Florida Statutes (1995). See also Raulerson v. State, 763 So.2d 285 (Fla. 2000) (agreeing with this court's interpretation of the term "conviction" as it is used in the DWLS statute). Because the state could have relied on appellant's withheld adjudications as a basis for habitualization, the issue of whether the subject predicate offense was uncounseled was not dispositive of the case and is not preserved on appeal.

Later, at the plea hearing, defense counsel told the judge that the issue was dispositive. There was no real acknowledgment of the attorney's assertion by the court.

We thus dismiss this appeal without prejudice to appellant seeking to withdraw his plea in post conviction proceedings. See Zambuto, 731 So.2d at 45. Because we dismiss his appeal, we do not address appellant's constitutional challenge to the DWLS statute.

Dismissed.

WARNER, C.J., FARMER and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Levine v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District
Jun 20, 2001
788 So. 2d 379 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

explaining that “[a]n issue is legally dispositive only if, regardless of whether the appellate court affirms or reverses the lower court's decision, there will be no trial of the case”

Summary of this case from Garcia-Roque v. State

suggesting the denial of a motion to discharge habitual DWLS might have been dispositive if the State had agreed that it had no way of presenting sufficient evidence of predicate offenses without the tainted case

Summary of this case from Peña v. State

suggesting the denial of a motion to discharge habitual DWLS might have been dispositive if the State had agreed that it had no way of presenting sufficient evidence of predicate offenses without the tainted case

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

Levine v. State

Case Details

Full title:BRYCE LEVINE, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District

Date published: Jun 20, 2001

Citations

788 So. 2d 379 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

Citing Cases

Peña v. State

In this context, an "issue is legally dispositive `only if, regardless of whether the appellate court affirms…

PEÑA v. State

In this context, an "issue is legally dispositive `only if, regardless of whether the appellate court affirms…