Background
Jammie Lemaire appealed a Bradford County Circuit Court judgment and sentence entered after she pleaded nolo contendere. The appeal proceeded under Anders v. California, and Lemaire challenged the voluntariness of her plea.
The record showed that Lemaire did not reserve any issue for appellate review when entering her plea. It also showed that her sentence fell within the criminal punishment code guidelines range.
The Court’s Holding
The First District held that Lemaire failed to preserve her challenge to the plea’s voluntariness because she did not move to withdraw the plea in the trial court after sentencing as required by Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(l).
Because no issue had been reserved for appeal and the sentence was within the guidelines range, the court affirmed the judgment and sentence under section 924.06, Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(2)(A).
Key Takeaways
- A defendant who seeks to challenge the voluntariness of a plea after sentencing must preserve that claim by filing a motion to withdraw the plea in the trial court.
- An unreserved nolo contendere plea limits the issues available for appellate review.
- The court affirmed where the plea challenge was unpreserved and the record showed a sentence within the criminal punishment code guidelines range.
Why It Matters
The decision underscores the procedural limits on appeals following nolo contendere pleas. A defendant generally cannot obtain appellate review of a plea-voluntariness claim without first presenting that issue to the trial court through the required post-sentencing motion.