Harrell v. State

Summary

The Supreme Court of Florida held that merely filing a presentence motion to withdraw a plea does not preserve a claim under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172(f) that the trial court failed to formally accept the plea. A defendant must specifically allege the failure of formal acceptance or invoke the rule, and the omission does not constitute fundamental error in these circumstances. The court approved the First District Court of Appeal's decision and disapproved Miller v. State to the extent inconsistent.

Holdings

1. The mere filing of a pre-sentencing motion to withdraw a plea does not preserve a claim that the defendant was entitled to withdraw the plea because the trial court failed formally to accept it under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172(f). The defendant must specifically invoke Rule 3.172(f) or allege in the motion that the trial court failed formally to accept the plea.
2. The failure formally to accept a plea does not constitute fundamental error permitting appellate review when the defendant failed to preserve the issue.
3. Before sentencing, Rule 3.172(f) governs withdrawal when a plea has not been formally accepted, while Rule 3.170(f) governs discretionary or good-cause withdrawal for other reasons; the two provisions must be read in pari materia.

Questions Presented

1. Whether merely filing a pre-sentencing motion to withdraw a plea preserves for appellate review a claim that the trial court failed formally to accept the plea under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.172(f) when the motion does not allege that failure.
2. Whether the trial court's failure formally to accept the plea constitutes fundamental error that may be raised for the first time on appeal.

Disposition

approved