MARQUEZ v. STATE (2022)

On the State's Concession

The defendant appealed his sentence for violating Palm Beach County Ordinance 18-7 for solicitation and distribution on public roads after the trial court denied his motion to dismiss. He argued the court erred in denying his motion to dismiss because the ordinance violated his first amendment rights. On April 27, 2022, the County repealed the ordinance.

The State has now filed a concession. “[T]he repeal of the statute pending an appeal will deprive the appellate court of any power to render a judgment by which this penalty may be enforced, and that the effect of a repealing statute is to obliterate the statute repealed as completely as if it had never been enacted ․” Pensacola & A.R. Co. v. State, 45 Fla. 86, 33 So. 985, 986 (1903). The State concedes the case should be remanded with instructions for the trial court to vacate the withhold of adjudication, permit the defendant to withdraw his plea, and the State to nolle prosse the charge. The defendant has responded and indicated we should simply reverse and remand the case for dismissal of the charges. Id. (“It follows from what has been said that the judgment of the circuit court in said cause must be reversed, and the cause dismissed.”). We agree with the defendant. We therefore reverse and remand the case for that purpose.

Reversed and remanded.

MAY, J.

Warner and Ciklin, JJ., concur.