Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...(j) A ruling granting a motion for judgment of acquittal after a jury verdict. (k) An order denying restitution under s. 775.089. ( l ) An order or ruling suppressing evidence or evidence in limine at trial. (m) An order withholding adjudication of guilt in violation of s. 775.08435....

...an order denying restitution under section 775.089." See ch. 93-37, § 14, Laws of Fla. Most recently, the Legislature added subsection (1)(m), which allows the State to appeal an order withholding adjudication of guilt in violation of newly created section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2004)....

...al court erred in failing to make written findings in conjunction with its decision to withhold adjudication. The State urges us to remand this matter to the trial court with instructions to adjudicate Calvert and in support of that request cites to section 775.08435(1)(b), Florida Statutes (2008), which states that: [T]he court may not withhold adjudication of guilt upon a defendant for: * * * (b) A second degree felony offense unless: 1....

...State, 698 So.2d 377, 378 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); State v. Rhoden, 448 So.2d 1013 (Fla.1984), receded from on other grounds by Maddox v. State, 760 So.2d 89, 100 (Fla.2000) and Cargle v. State, 770 So.2d 1151, 1154 n. 2 (Fla.2000). Failing to comply with the requirements of section 775.08435(1)(b), Fla....

...Stat., however, does not constitute fundamental error when the error benefits the defendant. See State v. Ackerman, 785 So.2d 1229, 1231 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001) ("Cases allowing sentencing errors to be reviewed as fundamental error involve defendants' challenges to their sentences, not the state's."). Similar to section 775.08435(1)(b), Fla....

...proper analysis. We affirm the sentence because the state failed to preserve the issue in the trial court."). We recognize our decision in State v. Fulmore, 2 So.3d 365 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008), but find it distinguishable. In Fulmore, the error involved section 775.08435(1)(c), Fla....

...WARNER, J., concurs specially with opinion. *950 WARNER, J., concurring specially. I concur based upon the reasoning of State v. Hewitt, 702 So.2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). The erroneous withholding of adjudication without providing written reasons pursuant to section 775.08435(1)(b), Florida Statutes, creates a judgment unauthorized by law, not necessarily an illegal judgment....

...ing in drug court, remorseful, and young. The State objected and argued that section 775.08485(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2012), prohibited the trial court from withholding adjudication a third time. The trial court nevertheless withheld adjudication. Section 775.08435(l)(c) prohibits a court from withholding adjudication on a third-degree felony offense if the defendant has two or more prior withholds for a felony that did not arise from the same transaction as the current charge....

...Here, the trial court withheld adjudication because the defendant “has strong family support. He’s a young man. He’s done good work. He’s suffered enough. And, let’s see. It’s the Court’s opinion it doesn’t require a lengthy prison sentence, the way it was drafted.” Despite the court’s findings, section 775.08435(l)(c) prohibits the trial court from withholding adjudication in this circumstance. We therefore reverse the sentence and remand the case to the trial court to re-sentence the defendant in accord with section 775.08435(l)(c)....

...est Palm Beach, for appellee. MAY, J. The State appeals a judgment withholding adjudication and placing the defendant on probation for possession of cocaine. It argues the trial court erred in refusing to adjudicate the defendant guilty, pursuant to section 775.08435(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2007)....

...A "court may not withhold adjudication of guilt upon the defendant for ... [a] third degree felony offense if the defendant has a prior withholding of adjudication for a felony offense that did not arise from the same transaction as the current felony offense." § 775.08435(1)(c), Fla....

...The only exceptions to this rule are when the prosecutor requests "in writing that adjudication be withheld" or if the "court makes written findings that the withholding of adjudication is reasonably justified based on circumstances or factors in accordance with those set forth in s. 921.0026." § 775.08435(1)(c)1....

...Thus, the statute limits the amount of felonies for which adjudication can be withheld. See State v. Fulmore, 2 So.3d 365 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). Regardless of which crime occurred first, once a defendant has been graced with a withhold of adjudication, section 775.08435(1)(c) prohibits a second withhold of adjudication if the felony offense did not "arise from the same transaction" and neither exception applies....

...At the plea hearing, Barfield requested a withholding of adjudication on the charges. The State objected, arguing that under Florida law the trial court cannot withhold adjudication on a third-degree felony if the defendant has had adjudication withheld on a prior felony charge. § 775.08435, Fla....

...The trial court disagreed and granted Barfield's request on the grounds that (1) the prior felony occurred in another state and (2) the State did not produce sufficient evidence of the prior felony. We find it unnecessary to determine whether withholding of adjudication on a felony in another state suffices under section 775.08435 because the State in this case failed to produce evidence of the prior felony or the prior withholding....

...hhold the adjudication of guilt; and, in either case, it shall stay and withhold the imposition of sentence upon such defendant and shall place the defendant upon probation. (Emphasis added). However, this power is not unlimited. As described above, section 775.08435 provides that adjudication of guilt cannot be withheld on a felony charge if the defendant has received a prior withholding: (1) Notwithstanding the provisions of s....

...The trial judge withheld adjudication and sentenced Fulmore to eighteen months probation. The state now timely appeals and argues that the trial court erred in withholding adjudication because it was prohibited from doing so under the applicable Florida statute. Section 775.08435(1)(c), Florida Statutes, provides that a trial court may not withhold adjudication of guilt upon the defendant for a third degree felony if "the defendant has a prior withholding of adjudication for a felony offense that did not ari...

...adjudication is justified given the circumstances of the case. Because Fulmore had benefitted from a withholding of adjudication in a prior felony case, in order to withhold adjudication of guilt in the present case, the trial court was required by section 775.08435(1)(c), Florida Statutes, to provide written justification....

...Alper, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee. LaROSE, Chief Judge. James William Braine pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated assault, a third-degree felony, and two misdemeanor counts. He now challenges the trial court's interpretation of section 775.08435(1), Florida Statutes (2016), in imposing sentences. Because the trial court correctly concluded that the statute circumscribed its discretion to withhold adjudication on the felony offense, we affirm.  Background Mr. Braine asked the trial court to withhold adjudication for his third-degree felony offense. Section 775.08435(1)(c)(1) and (2)1, limits the trial court's ability to withhold adjudication for a third-degree felony "if the defendant has a prior withhold[] of adjudication"; the state attorney must make a written request, or the trial court must provide written findings of mitigating factors. § 775.08435(1)(c)(1), (2), Fla. Stat. (2016). Critically, section 775.08435 further constrains the trial court's authority: "Notwithstanding any provision of this section, no adjudication of guilt shall be withheld for a third degree felony offense if the defendant has two or more prior withholdings of adjudication for a felony that did not arise from the same transaction as the current felony offense." § 775.08435(1). The trial court found two mitigating factors that would reasonably justify withholding adjudication....

...Second, he required specialized mental health treatment. However, Mr. Braine previously received withholds for two prior third-degree felonies in a more than twenty-year-old case. The State maintained that the trial court lacked authority to grant a third withhold under section 775.08435(1). The trial court agreed. It adjudicated Mr. Braine guilty on all three counts and sentenced him to probation. 1A 2017 amendment to section 775.08435 moved this provision location to section 775.08435(1)(d)....

...2d 1138, 1140 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (affirming withhold of adjudication where "the State did not produce any evidence of a prior felony or a prior withholding"). As framed by Mr. Braine, the only issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred by determining that section 775.08435 removed its discretion to withhold adjudication when the two prior withholds arose from the same case....

...reasonably understood to mean two different things." Burgess v. State, 198 So. 3d 1151, 1155 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016) (citing Fajardo v. State, 805 So. 2d 961, 963-64 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)). -3-  Section 775.08435(1) restricts the court's discretion to withhold adjudication....

...As relevant here, "[n]otwithstanding any provision of this section, no adjudication of guilt shall be withheld for a third degree felony offense if the defendant has two or more prior withholdings of adjudication for a felony that did not arise from the same transaction as the current felony offense." §775.08435(1) (emphasis added). Mr....

...This interpretation, however, ignores the plain meaning of the statute. The legislature created a "same transaction" exception for a current felony offense that arose from the same transaction as a prior felony offense. The only transactional relationship relevant under section 775.08435(1) is the relationship between the current felony offense and a prior felony offense, not, as Mr....

...4th DCA 2013). In Jean, the trial court withheld adjudication for a third-degree felony, although the defendant had previously received two prior withholds. Id. at 452. The Fourth District reversed and remanded, holding that "[d]espite the court's findings, section 775.08435(1)(c) prohibits the trial court from withholding adjudication in this -4- circumstance." Id....

...The Fourth District relied on the plain language of the statute and determined that the two prior withholds barred the defendant from receiving a third. Id. See also State v. Cook, 14 So. 3d 1155, 1156 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009) ("[O]nce a defendant has been graced with a withhold of adjudication, section 775.08435(1)(c) prohibits a second withhold of adjudication if the felony offense did not 'arise from the same transaction' ....

...."). He posits that the trial court's interpretation of the statute rewards an escalation in felonious conduct and punishes those demonstrating improved behavior. For example, a defendant who has previously received one withhold, is not barred by section 775.08435(1) from receiving two or more in a later case, thereby rewarding an escalation in criminal behavior. Conversely, section 775.08435(1) prohibits a defendant who previously received two withholds in the same case, from receiving one in a later case, punishing what appears to be a downward trend in criminal activity. Therefore, Mr. Braine urges that the statute should be interpreted as treating all withholds that result from the same transaction as one withhold. We cannot agree with Mr. Braine. Section 775.08435(1) limits the availability of withholds for repeat felony offenders....

...The offense in this case is unrelated to the offenses that gave rise to Mr. Braine's two prior withholds. Therefore, Mr. Braine is ineligible for an additional withhold. Conclusion Because the trial court correctly applied section 775.08435(1), we affirm. Affirmed. KELLY and MORRIS, JJ., Concur. -6- 

...Because the defendant has previously been convicted of a felony offense for which he received a withhold of adjudication, the trial court did not provide written reasons justifying the granting of a second withhold of adjudication, and the oral reason articulated by the trial court is invalid, we reverse. Section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2007), provides in relevant part: (1) [T]he court may not withhold adjudication of guilt upon the defendant for: .......

...felony offense was justified pursuant to section 921.0026, Florida Statutes (2007). The trial court, however, failed to make any written findings. The defendant argues that despite the trial court's failure to provide written reasons as required by section 775.08435, the sentence should be affirmed because the trial court "orally pronounce[d] valid *390 reasons for departure at the time of sentencing." We conclude, however, that the reason orally articulated by the trial court in the instant ca...

...1 The withhold of adjudication was entered after Foster entered an open no-contest plea to the sale or possession of a controlled substance with intent to sell within 1000 feet of a school or child care facility. See § 402.302, Fla. Stat. (2010). Commendably, Foster concedes error, based upon the plain language of section 775.08435(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2012), which prohibits a court from withholding an adjudication of guilt upon a defendant who commits a first-degree felony, and State v. Joseph, 995 So.2d 1182 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2008) (recognizing that section 775.08435(l)(a) prohibits trial courts from withholding an adjudication of guilt on a defendant convicted of a first-degree felony)....

...ilt is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See Sanchez v. State, 541 So.2d 1140, 1141 (Fla.1989) (quoting § 948.01(3), Fla. Stat. (1985)). Senger acknowledges that because the charge of traveling after solicita *145 tion is a second-degree felony, section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2011), provides that a court may not withhold an adjudication of guilt unless either the State requests it or the court makes written findings reasonably justifying the withholding of an adjudication of guilt base...

...of alprazolam) and one misdemeanor (possession of cannabis). Both before the trial judge and now on appeal, the State argues that the trial court erred in withholding adjudication on the two third degree drug felony charges as being in violation of section 775.08435(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2008). Because the State is simply not honing in on the wording of the applicable statute, we must disagree and affirm. At the plea hearing, the State recommended that the defendant be adjudicated and objected to a withhold pursuant to section 775.08435(1)(c), because, the State urged, the defendant had "several prior felony convictions." But this is not what section 775.08435(1)(c) provides. Section 775.08435(1)(c) prohibits a court from withholding adjudication of guilt upon a defendant for "[a] third degree felony offense if the defendant has a prior withholding of adjudication for a felony offense that did not arise from the same tran...

...no indication in writing whether or not it's a felony or a misdemeanor"—the State failed to produce evidence of a prior felony withholding. Id. at 1139. (alteration in original). Simply put, the State failed to provide sufficient *662 evidence for section 775.08435(1)(c) to be applied....

...The State correctly argues that the trial court erroneously withheld adjudication for the third-degree felony because Ly had two or more prior withholdings of adjudication for felonies that did not arise from the same transaction as the current felony offense. See § 775.08435(1)(c)2, Fla....

...equests in writing that adjudication be withheld,” or “[t]he court makes written findings that the withholding of adjudication is reasonably justified based on circumstances or factors in accordance with those set forth in [section] 921.0026.” § 775.08435(l)(b) 1., 2., Fla....

...Indeed, the trial court did not even orally set forth any rationale for failing to follow the statute’s mandate. In the present case, the State did not request a withhold of adjudication, and the judge failed to make any written findings required by section 775.08435(l)(b)2....

...That offense is a first-degree felony punishable by life imprisonment. Id. The trial court chose to withhold adjudication and imposed a fifteen-year term of probation. Mr. Joseph concedes, and we agree, that the withhold of adjudication was error. Section 775.08435(1)(a) provides that a trial court may not withhold adjudication of guilt for "[a]ny capital, life, or first degree felony offense." Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's withhold of adjudication and remand for an adjudication of *1183 guilt....

was statutorily precluded from doing so. See § 775.08435(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2022). Accordingly, we reverse

...filed a notice of appeal and an appellate case number was assigned. The court denied that motion without a hearing. Our review is de novo. Cromartie v. State, 70 So. 3d 559, 563 (Fla. 2011).  As Appellee concedes, the trial court erred in this case because section 775.08435(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2015), prohibits a court from withholding adjudication of guilt for “[a]ny capital, life, or first degree felony offense.” See also State v....

...Defense counsel asked the court to withhold adjudication and place the defendant on drug offender probation. He argued section 948.20 allowed the court to do so if it found the defendant was a chronic substance abuser. The State objected, and argued that under section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2019), adjudication could not be withheld if the defendant had two or more prior withholds for felonies that did not arise from the same transaction as the current offense. The trial court ultimately agreed wi...

...interest in having its decision appealed “so we can get a ruling on this.” The trial court found the defendant was a chronic substance abuser, withheld adjudication, and imposed two years of drug offender probation. The State now appeals. The State continues to argue section 775.08435 prohibits the trial court from withholding adjudication where the defendant has received two or more prior withholds....

...If the Legislature had intended to make an exception, it would have done so clearly and unequivocally. The defendant responds the issue is not preserved as the State provided no evidence of the defendant’s prior withholds. Alternatively, if the merits of the State’s argument are reached, section 948.20 controls over section 775.08435 because the former is unequivocal and was enacted after section 775.08435....

...and the rule of lenity mandates that statutory language subject to differing constructions be construed in the accused’s favor. We have de novo review of this legal issue. Pinkard v. State, 185 So. 3d 1289, 1289–90 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016). 2 Section 775.08435 provides: Notwithstanding any provision of this section, no adjudication of guilt shall be withheld for a third degree felony offense if the 2 The State preserved the issue when it objected to the court withholding adj...

...Rotella & Assocs., P.A., 906 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005). 2  defendant has two or more prior withholdings of adjudication for a felony that did not arise from the same transaction as the current felony offense. § 775.08435(1)(d), Fla....

...old the imposition of sentence and place the defendant on drug offender probation or into a postadjudicatory treatment-based drug court program if the defendant otherwise qualifies.” Id. The State suggests that section 948.20(1) does not trump section 775.08435 because the latter clearly mandates that adjudication cannot be withheld on a third-degree felony if the defendant previously received two or more withholds. The defendant responds section 948.20(1)’s specific provisions control over the general provisions of section 775.08435. Section 948.20(1) is the last expression of legislative intent because it was amended after section 775.08435....

...probation is consistent with strong policy considerations that treatment is the most effective way to rehabilitate a chronic substance abuser like the defendant. Section 948.20’s specific provision covering drug offender probation controls over the general provisions of section 775.08435. And, section 948.20 was enacted after section 775.08435, expressing the latest in legislative intent. Lastly, “[t]he rules of statutory construction require courts to strictly construe criminal statutes, and ....

timely appealed. 1 Pursuant to section 775.08435(l)(b)l., 2., Florida Statutes (2015), in order

...The State of Florida appeals the trial court's order withholding adjudication. The trial court erred when it imposed a withhold of adjudication for a second-degree felony where the defendant, Leon Pearson, had a previous withhold of adjudication for a felony. Section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2009), provides that "no adjudication of guilt shall be withheld for a second degree felony offense if the defendant has a prior withholding of adjudication for a felony that did not arise from the same transactio...

...uilt is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. See Sanchez v. State, 541 So. 2d 1140, 1141 (Fla. 1989) (quoting § 948.01(3), Fla. Stat. (1985)). Senger acknowledges that because the charge of traveling after solicitation is a second-degree felony, section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2011), provides that a court may not withhold an adjudication of guilt unless either the State requests it or the court makes written findings reasonably justifying the withholding of an adjudication of guilt b...

...The State maintains that section 790.163(2) represents an exception to the law giving the trial court discretion to withhold adjudication of guilt. See Fla. R. Crim P. 3.670 (allowing a judge to withhold an adjudication of guilt if the judge places the defendant on probation where allowed by law); see also § 775.08435, Fla....

...that statutory provision was apparently not argued by the state in that case. Instead, the state’s argument in Platt was that the trial court erred because (1) it withheld adjudication of guilt for the offense without a written request from the state as required by sections 775.08435(1)(b)1. and 2., Florida Statutes (2015), and (2) there was insufficient competent, substantial evidence to support the grounds asserted for a downward departure....

...Instead, in our view, the Fifth District quoted the portion of section 790.163(2) in its footnote presumably to alert the trial court about the prohibition against withholding of guilt. As mentioned above, one of the arguments raised in Platt involved noncompliance with section 775.08435(1)(b)1....

...adjudication on one count because of Ervin’s plea to a first degree felony. The State is correct. The controlling statute specifically states that “the court may not withhold adjudication of guilt upon the defendant for: (a) Any capital, life, or first degree felony offense.” § 775.08435(1)(a), Fla....

...ests in writing that adjudication be withheld,” or “[t]he court makes written findings that the withholding of adjudication is reasonably justified based on circumstances or factors in accordance ■with those set forth in [section] 921.0026.” § 775.08435(l)(b)l., 2., Fla....

withholding adjudication of guilt pursuant to section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2017), or alternatively

...The State correctly argues that the trial court erroneously withheld adjudication for the third- degree felony because Ly had two or more prior withholdings of adjudication for felonies that did not arise from the same transaction as the current felony offense. See § 775.08435(1)(c)2., Fla....

PER CURIAM. The State of Florida appeals the trial court’s withhold of adjudication of the conviction against Scott Ketchum for one count of grand theft in the first degree; in violation of section 812.014(2)(a), Florida Statutes (2007). Section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2007), prohibits a withhold of *198 adjudication for first-degree felonies....

...In the instant case, defense counsel requested that Appellant be sworn, and did not otherwise place the trial court on notice that Appellant sought an opportunity to allocute. Thus, we do not address this issue on appeal. 2 defense counsel argued that, based on section 775.08435, Florida Statutes, the trial court may withhold adjudication if there are mitigating circumstances such as those set forth in the downward departure statute (section 921.0026, Florida Statutes)....

...ida Statutes. Adjudication had previously been withheld upon another felony and the court was therefore precluded from withholding ad *1277 judication here, unless requested by the prosecutor or unless the court made written findings as specified in section 775.08435(l)(c), Florida Statutes....

...The appealed order is reversed as to the withheld adjudication for the MDMA offense, and the case is remanded. If the prosecutor does not request a withheld adjudication on remand, the court should either enter an adjudication of guilt or make the necessary findings under section 775.08435(l)(e)....

...grand theft charge before the trial court. Ultimately, the trial court sentenced Ester to six months of community control followed by thirty-six months of probation and withheld adjudication of guilt, over the State’s objection. This appeal followed. Section 775.08435(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2018), states: “Notwithstanding any provision of this section, no adjudication of guilt shall be withheld for a third degree felony offense if the defendant has two or more prior withholdings of adjudication for a felony that did not arise from the same transaction as the current felony offense.” (emphasis added). Under the language of section 775.08435(1)(d), the trial judge in this case was prohibited from withholding adjudication. See State v. Jean, 114 So. 3d 451, 452 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013). Accordingly, we reverse the sentence and remand for the trial court to re-sentence the defendant in accordance with section 775.08435....

...out merit and require no further discussion. 2  Thereafter, Appellant filed a motion to vacate the Youthful Offender judgment and sentence, contending that a withhold of adjudication was prohibited by section 775.08435(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2013), and thus the judgment was “illegal” and “void.” Appellant contends that, because the trial court was not authorized to withhold adjudication of guilt in this case, the judgment was void ab initio, and therefore the judgment, and the sentence imposed upon that judgment, must be vacated.2 Specifically, appellant asserts that section 775.08435(1)(a) required the trial court to adjudicate appellant guilty and that the trial court was without authority to withhold adjudication for the offense of robbery with a weapon....

...However, the mandatory adjudication statute, which was adopted by the Florida Legislature in 2004,3 cannot be read in a 2 Because we hold that the judgment was validly imposed, we need not address the State’s additional arguments: that the failure to comply with the requirements of section 775.08435(1)(b) does not constitute fundamental error when such error benefits the defendant; and that appellant is estopped or otherwise precluded, under principles of contract law, from challenging the validity or legality of the judgment w...

...youthful offender treatment. Simpkins v. State, 784 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001); Hill v. State, 434 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983). 4 other circumstances render a withhold of adjudication impermissible under section 775.08435(1)(a). The mandatory adjudication provision of section 775.08435(1)(a) is inapplicable to, and does not supersede, a judgment and sentence imposed pursuant to the Youthful Offender Act....

...The State appeals from a final order withholding an adjudication of guilt on a third-degree felony charge. It argues that the trial court impermissibly withheld adjudication on the third-degree felony in violation of the plain text of section 775.08435(1)(d), Florida Statutes (2019)....

...exactly how many times Defendant had received withholds of adjudication of guilt on prior felonies. The circuit court took the position that multiple withholds in a prior case counted as only one withhold for purposes of eligibility to receive a withhold in a subsequent case under section 775.08435(1)(d).  As the primary justification for an additional withhold of adjudication, the circuit court referenced the Defendant’s desire to turn his life around and pursue substance abuse treatment. Analysis Section 775.08435(1)(d) prohibits a court from withholding adjudication of guilt if the defendant has a prior withholding of adjudication for a qualifying felony offense that did not arise from the same transaction as the current felony offense unles...

...xceptions and exclude subsequent withholds. This interpretation of the statutory text has been explained multiple times by our court. See, e.g., State v. Cook, 14 So. 3d at 1156 (“[O]nce a defendant has been graced with a withhold of adjudication, section 775.08435(1)(c) prohibits a second withhold of adjudication if the felony offense did not ‘arise from the same transaction’ and neither exception applies.”). 2  In Jean, we held that a defenda...

...arising out of the same transaction or incident. Conclusion Thus, the relationship between the two transactions is binary, such that, within the first transaction, the number of offenses is immaterial to trigger section 775.08435 (1)(d) and its concluding proviso, but a second transaction triggers (1)(d) of this section—and consequently, both the discretion afforded by exceptions (1)(d)1....

...3d 1155, 1156 (Fla. 4th DCA 2009), and Braine v. State, 255 So. 3d 470, 472–73 (Fla. 2d DCA 2018), all hold that where the defendant has two prior withholds from a crime or crimes which do not arise from the same transaction as the current felony, section 775.08435(1)(c), Florida Statutes (2018), prevents the court from withholding adjudication again....

...After a jury found Appellee guilty of a first-degree felony, the trial court, over the State’s objection, withheld adjudication of guilt and imposed a probationary sentence. The State appeals the trial court’s failure to adjudicate Appellee guilty. 1 We reverse because section 775.08435(l)(a), Florida Statutes (2009), prohibits a court from *960 withholding an adjudication of guilt upon a defendant who is found to have committed a first-degree felony....

...No comments were submitted to the Committee or filed with the Court. The Committee proposes a new subdivision (L) to rule 9.140(c)(1) in response to chapter 2004-60, Laws of Florida,' which became effective July 1, 2004. See ch. 2004-60, § 4, at 444, Laws of Fla. Chapter 2004-60, section 1, created section 775.08435, Florida Statutes, which prohibits the withholding of an adjudication of guilt in felony cases in certain circumstances and provides that the withholding of adjudication in violation of the statute is subject to appellate review under chapter 924. See § 775.08435(1), (3), Fla....

...The committee also amended and transferred subdivisions (i) and (j) to rule 9.141 for the reasons specified in the committee note for that rule. 2005 Amendment. New subdivision (L) was added to (c)(1) in response to the *119 Florida legislature’s enactment of section 775.08435(3), Florida Statutes (2004), which provides that “[t]he withholding of adjudication in violation of this section is subject to appellate review under chapter 924” Court Commentary 1996....

...n re Approval of Form for Use by Clerks of the Circuit Courts Pursuant to Rule 10-2.1(a) of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, 877 So.2d 720 (Fla.2004). The Committee also proposes an amendment to rule 3.670 in response to the recent enactment of section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2004)....

...s against the state.” The Committee proposed this amendment in response to the 1998 Revision No. 7 to Article V of the Florida Constitution. See Constitution Revision Commission, Revision No. 7, 1998 (filed with the Secretary of State May 5,1998). Section 775.08435, Florida Statutes, which was created by chapter 2004-60, section 1, Laws of Florida, prohibits the withholding of adjudication of guilt in felony cases in certain circumstances. Section 3 of chapter 2004-60 repealed rule 3.670 to the extent the rule is inconsistent with the new law. See eh. 2004-60, § 3, at 444, Laws of Fla. In order to avoid any inconsistency with section 775.08435, we amend rule 3.670, as proposed by the Committee, to read: If the defendant is found guilty, a judgment of guilty and, if the defendant has been acquitted, a judgment of not guilty shall be rendered in open court and in writing, signed by the judge, filed, and recorded....

...The purpose of the proposed rule is to provide assurance that a defendant, represented or unrepresented by counsel, will have authoritative and timely notice of the right to appeal. ’ 1972 Amendment. Same as prior rule [but some terminology has been changed]. 2005 Amendment. Amended to conform with section 775.08435, Florida Statutes (2004), effective July 1, 2004 (ch....