LIGHTSEY v. STATE (2022)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Tavarus LIGHTSEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D20-376

Decided: November 10, 2022

Before FERNANDEZ, C.J., and LINDSEY, and LOBREE, JJ.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Andrew Stanton, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Linda Katz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Affirmed. See Alcorn v. State, 121 So. 3d 419, 430 (Fla. 2013) (“In Florida, trial courts and prosecutors have [the] discretion [to accept or reject a plea].”); Odegaard v. State, 137 So. 3d 505, 508 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014) (“Even where trial counsel's misadvice results in a defendant's rejection of a favorable plea offer, the State is not required to reoffer its original plea on remand.”); Vennisee v. State, 235 So. 3d 947 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017) (citing Davis v. State, 223 So. 3d 1106 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017, for the proposition that a juvenile who commits a substantive violation of probation as an adult is not entitled to be sentenced under Florida's juvenile sentencing scheme); Woods v. State, 314 So. 3d 683 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021), review denied, SC21-269, 2021 WL 2434584 (Fla. June 15, 2021); Connolly v. State, 172 So. 3d 893 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015).

PER CURIAM.

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Out of date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