Gomez v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
DANIEL S. PEARSON, Judge.
Gomez and Molina, defendants below, appeal from the summary denial of their Rule 3.850 motion to vacate their convictions and sentences for possession of marijuana entered upon their pleas of nolo contendere. We affirm.
The defendants urged two grounds for relief in their motion to vacate. First, they *207alleged that their agreement to enter nolo contendere pleas, being based in part on the State’s stipulation that the trial court’s ruling on the defendants’ motion to dismiss the information was dispositive of the case, was frustrated when this court on appeal of that…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Knight v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1981
- Finney v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
- Arnold v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- Gray v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- Carr v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.