ARTHUR RICHARD EHRHARDT v. STATE OF FLORIDA (2023)

Arthur Ehrhardt appeals his plea of nolo contendere to false imprisonment and sentence to twenty-four months’ probation. The record does not indicate Ehrhardt ever attempted to withdraw his plea, nor does the transcript of his plea hearing suggest Ehrhardt preserved his right to appeal in any way. Without any contemporaneously reserved issue or a preserved direct appeal under one of the four exceptions described in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii)a.–d., any other matters raised on appeal “must be preserved by a motion to withdraw a plea before [those matters] may be raised on direct appeal.” Harriel v. State, 710 So. 2d 102, 104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

Ehrhardt neither reserved the right to appeal by contemporaneously preserving an issue nor moved to withdraw the entry of his no contest plea. Accordingly, we affirm pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.315(a), which allows summary affirmance where an appellant fails to demonstrate any basis for reversal after appealing under Rule 9.140. See Leonard v. State, 760 So. 2d 114, 119 (Fla. 2000) (requiring district courts summarily affirm, rather than dismiss, frivolous appeals after entry of a nolo contendere plea). See also Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(b)(2)(A)(i)–(ii); Fla. R. App. P. 9.135(a).

Affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.