TEAGUE v. STATE (1999)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Fifth District.

Chapelle L. TEAGUE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 98-2105.

Decided: March 12, 1999

James B. Gibson, Public Defender, and Kenneth Witts, Assistant Public Defender, Daytona Beach, for Appellant. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Maximillian J. Changus, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee.

We dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

Chapelle Teague entered a plea of nolo contendere to the charge of carrying a concealed firearm.¹ Before entering his plea, Mr. Teague stated that he was reserving his right to appeal the trial court's order denying his motion to suppress. However, Mr. Teague did not specify that the ruling on the motion to suppress was dispositive nor did the trial court make such an express finding. When a defendant enters a plea of nolo contendere, absent a showing that the issue challenged on appeal is dispositive of the underlying case, this court lacks jurisdiction to review the issue. See White v. State, 661 So.2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995); see also Benelhocine v. State, 717 So.2d 103 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

FOOTNOTES

1. § 790.01(2), Fla. Stat. (1997).

ANTOON, J.

COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network