Salus Populi Suprema Lex Esto
Please E-mail suggested additions, comments and/or corrections to Kent@MoreLaw.Com.
Help support the publication of case reports on MoreLaw
JOHNATHAN OSHAUN GOULD vs STATE OF FLORIDA
Case Number: 17-2595
Judge: F. Rand Wallis
Court: DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
Plaintiff's Attorney: Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kellie A. Nielan, Assistant Attorney General
Defendant's Attorney: James S. Purdy, Public Defender, and Ailene S. Rogers, Assistant Public Defender
At the sentencing hearing, in response to Gould's ore tenus motion to withdraw his
previously entered guilty plea, the trial court asked if Gould had filed a written motion.
When Gould explained that he had not, the trial court denied the motion and instructed
Gould to file a written motion at an appropriate time.
As we explained in McInturff v. State, 111 So. 3d 296, 297 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013),
"there is no requirement that a motion to withdraw a guilty plea be in writing," and a motion
raised at a sentencing hearing, but prior to the imposition of sentence, is a timely Florida
Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(f) motion. Based on the record, the trial court, like the
court in McInturff, denied the motion because it was not written. See id. This was
reversible error because a written motion was not required, and the trial court should have
given Gould an opportunity to be heard on his motion. See id.; see also Lehmkuhle v.
State, 20 So. 3d 971, 974 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) ("The trial court here should have given
Lehmkuhle an opportunity to be heard before ruling on his motion."); Morales v. State,
973 So. 2d 679, 681 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008) (holding that defendant who orally moved to
withdraw plea at beginning of sentencing should have been given opportunity to present
argument and be heard on his motion to withdraw plea before sentencing).
Outcome: Accordingly, we reverse and remand the case to the trial court to hold a hearing on Gould's motion.