Case Name: Antonio SANCHEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2002-01-16
Citations: 806 So. 2d 564
Docket Number: No. 4D01-4114
Parties: Antonio SANCHEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
Judges: GUNTHER, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 806
Pages: 564–565

Head Matter:
Antonio SANCHEZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
No. 4D01-4114.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Jan. 16, 2002.
Antonio Sanchez, Miami, pro se.
No appearance required for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
As we did in Stretcher v. State, 01-2943 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001), we affirm the denial of appellant's rule 3.850 motion and certify as a question of great public importance the same question certified in Major v. State, 790 So.2d 550 (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 DEFENDANT COMMITS A NEW CRIME IN THE FUTURE?
GUNTHER, TAYLOR and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.