Legal Opinion

Doyle v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 13, 2002No. 4D01-4910PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We affirm the order summarily denying appellant’s motion for postconviction relief, seeking to vacate his conviction based on the alleged involuntariness of his plea. See Stretcher v. State, 803 So.2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). As we did in Stretcher, we certify the same question certified in Major v. State, 790 So.2d 550, 552 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001).

WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT OR COUNSEL HAVE A DUTY TO ADVISE A DEFENDANT THAT HIS PLEA IN A PENDING CASE MAY HAVE SENTENCE ENHANCING CONSEQUENCES IF THE' DEFENDANT COMMITS A NEW CRIME IN THE FUTURE?

WARNER, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Major v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001
  2. Stretcher v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2001

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Prudential Securities, Inc. v. KatzDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002