Case Name: Gary Andrew DOYLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2002-01-30
Citations: 805 So. 2d 1069
Docket Number: No. 4D01-4551
Parties: Gary Andrew DOYLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: GUNTHER, HAZOURI and MAY, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 805
Pages: 1069–1070

Head Matter:
Gary Andrew DOYLE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 4D01-4551.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Jan. 30, 2002.
Richard W. Springer of Richard W. Springer, P.A., Palm Springs, for appellant.
Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Georgina Jimenez-Orosa, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the order summarily denying Appellant's two motions for post-conviction relief, both seeking to vacate his convictions based on the alleged involuntariness of his pleas. See Stretcher v. State, 803 So.2d 813 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). As we did in Stretcher, we certify as a question of great public importance the same question certified in Major v. State, 790 So.2d 550, 552 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001):
WHETHER THE TRIAL COURT OR COUNSEL HAVE A DUTY TO ADVISE A DEFENDANT THAT HIS PLEA IN A PENDING CASE MAY HAVE SENTENCE ENHANCING CONSEQUENCES IF THE DEFEN DANT COMMITS A NEW CRIME IN THE FUTURE?
GUNTHER, HAZOURI and MAY, JJ., concur.