KEY v. STATE (2025)

Robert Key appeals from the trial court's order reimposing his 30-year sentence for aggravated battery following this Court's remand in Key v. State, 357 So. 3d 1227 (Fla. 4th DCA 2023). In the prior appeal, we determined that Key received ineffective assistance of counsel based on defense counsel's failure to advise Key that he qualified for habitual offender sentencing, resulting in Key rejecting a favorable plea offer. We remanded for the trial court to “determine an appropriate remedy” pursuant to Lafler v. Cooper, 566 U.S. 156 (2012). Key, 357 So. 3d at 1229.

We find no error in the trial court's decision to reimpose Key's original 30-year sentence instead of accepting the State's reoffer of 15 years. In “lost plea” situations like this, Lafler affords a trial court the discretion to accept the offer or leave the original sentence undisturbed. Lafler, 566 U.S. at 174; see also Alexander v. State, 361 So. 3d 942, 943 (Fla. 5th DCA 2023) (explaining that in “lost plea” cases, the proper remedy is for the State to reoffer the rejected plea, and “the trial court would then be required to exercise its discretion” to accept the plea or leave the original sentence undisturbed).

We reject Key's contention that the remedy described in Lester v. State, 15 So. 3d 728 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009), applies here, as Lester has been superseded by Lafler.

Affirmed.

Per Curiam.

Ciklin, Gerber and Levine, JJ., concur.