NORRIS v. STATE (1997)

District Court of Appeal of Florida,Second District.

Edward NORRIS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 96-01659.

Decided: March 26, 1997

J.L.“ Ray” LeGrande of LeGrande & LeGrande, P.A., Fort Myers, for Appellant. Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Dale E. Tarpley, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

Edward Norris appeals his habitual offender sentence which the trial court imposed after he entered a plea of no contest to burglary. We reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to permit Norris to withdraw his plea.

Prior to the acceptance of Norris's plea, the trial court failed to confirm that Norris was personally aware of the consequences of receiving a habitual offender sentence. Such consequences include the maximum habitual offender term and the fact that habitualization may affect the possibility of early release. See State v. Wilson, 658 So.2d 521 (Fla.1995); Ashley v. State, 614 So.2d 486 (Fla.1993). Therefore, there was no showing that Norris knowingly and intelligently entered the plea.

Accordingly, we vacate Norris's sentence and remand this case to the trial court to allow Norris the opportunity to withdraw his plea. See Bell v. State, 624 So.2d 821 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993).

BLUE, Judge.

DANAHY, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., 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Out of date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