Case Name: STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Thomas Winfield NICHOLS, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1988-09-28
Citations: 536 So. 2d 1052
Docket Number: No. 87-3111
Parties: STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Thomas Winfield NICHOLS, Appellee.
Judges: ANSTEAD, J., concurs.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 536
Pages: 1052–1054

Head Matter:
STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Thomas Winfield NICHOLS, Appellee.
No. 87-3111.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Sept. 28, 1988.
Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee,' and John W. Tiedemann, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Michael D. Gelety, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

Opinion:
ON REHEARING
GUNTHER, Judge.
We grant the motion for rehearing and substitute the following opinion:
This is an appeal from a sentence. We vacate the defendant's sentence and remand.
Defendant entered a guilty plea to trafficking in cocaine and was adjudicated and sentenced to three years' incarceration. At sentencing, both parties acknowledged that the recommended guidelines range was 4½ to 5V2 years. Over State objection, the trial court downwardly departed by imposing a three-year sentence and waiving the $50,-000 fine mandated by section 893.-135(l)(b)(l), Florida Statutes (1985).
The defendant agrees with the State's contention that the trial court erred by downwardly departing from the recommended guidelines sentence without providing written reasons therefor. Consequently, we agree that the sentence must be reversed and remanded.
However, we disagree with the State's assertion that, since the defendant entered an open plea, upon remand, the defendant must be resentenced under the guidelines and the $50,000 fine imposed.
At sentencing, the attorney for the defendant stated that the defendant was pleading to trafficking in cocaine for a sentence of three years and that the defendant was waiving his well-founded motion to suppress. The State responded by objecting to a below guidelines sentence. When the court adjudicated the defendant and only imposed a three-year sentence and assessed no fine, the State reminded the trial court that normally a $50,000 fine was imposed. Defendant's attorney responded by saying that that was one of the defendant's major considerations on the plea. The trial court then stated that the fine was waived.
These statements, in the context of the entire record of the sentencing, indicate that it was a negotiated plea situation and not an open plea. In our view, the record reveals that in exchange for the defendant not pursuing his motion to suppress, the trial judge agreed to waive the imposition of the $50,000 fine and to sentence the defendant to three years rather than the 4V2-year guideline sentence. Thus, since the plea negotiated and sentence imposed by the court are not viable, upon remand the defendant shall be given the opportunity to withdraw his plea.
Accordingly, the sentence is vacated with directions to afford the defendant the opportunity to withdraw his plea. See State v. Mathews, 520 So.2d 62 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); State v. Hopkins, 520 So.2d 301 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). If he does not, he shall be sentenced in accordance with the guidelines.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
ANSTEAD, J., concurs.
GLICKSTEIN, J., concurs specially with opinion.