Case Name: Edmund K. McINTYRE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1983-03-15
Citations: 427 So. 2d 1108
Docket Number: No. 82-162
Parties: Edmund K. McINTYRE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARK-DULL and FERGUSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 427
Pages: 1108–1109

Head Matter:
Edmund K. McINTYRE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 82-162.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
March 15, 1983.
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender and Bruce A. Rosenthal, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen. and Penny Her-shoff Brill, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BARK-DULL and FERGUSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The defendant challenges the trial court's retention of jurisdiction over the first one-third of the sentences imposed after he pled guilty to charges of kidnapping and aggravated battery. Section 947.16, Florida Statutes (1981). Since the record shows that McIntyre neither objected to this aspect of the sentence nor sought to withdraw the plea on that ground below, the point— which essentially concerns the voluntariness and knowledgeability of the plea, Viars v. State, 415 So.2d 75 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)— may not be raised on this direct appeal. Robinson v. State, 373 So.2d 898 (Fla.1979); Ratushinak v. State, 425 So.2d 1204 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Medina v. State, 411 So.2d 323 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Griffin v. State, 403 So.2d 623 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). The judgment and sentences are therefore affirmed without prejudice to the filing of an appropriate motion under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. Ratushinak v. State, supra; Griffin v. State, supra.