Case Name: Amanda BEVERLY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1976-04-23
Citations: 330 So. 2d 515
Docket Number: No. Z-5
Parties: Amanda BEVERLY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: BOYER, C. J., and RAWLS and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 330
Pages: 515–516

Head Matter:
Amanda BEVERLY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. Z-5.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
April 23, 1976.
Richard W. Ervin, III, Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Andrew W. Lindsey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for ap-pellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
By per curiam order filed hereon on November 24, 1975, (Beverly v. State, Fla.App. 1st 1975, 322 So.2d 597) we allowed appellant until November 29, 1975, within which to file a supplemental record reflecting that his plea of nolo contendere was conditioned upon a reservation or right to appellate review of a question of law as permitted by State v. Ashby, Sup.Ct.Fla. 1971, 245 So.2d 225. Appellant thereafter filed a motion to which was attached an affidavit of his trial counsel, who does not appear to have been a public defender nor otherwise an employee of the state, requesting that such affidavit be made and considered as a part of the record on appeal. That motion was granted by our order of January 16, 1976.
The record, as supplemented by said affidavit, fails to reveal that appellant's plea of nolo contendere was conditioned upon any reservation of right nor does the record reveal that appellate review has been frustrated by any state action. (Hollingshead v. Wainwright, Sup.Ct.Fla.1967, 194 So.2d 577)
Accordingly, in accordance with the concluding paragraph of our per curiam order filed November 24, 1975, above mentioned, the judgment and sentence here appealed are
AFFIRMED."
BOYER, C. J., and RAWLS and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.