Court Opinion

ID: 9405415
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-28 15:11:15.578751+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:21.923084
License: Public Domain

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
                             FOURTH DISTRICT

                    ARTHUR RICHARD EHRHARDT,
                             Appellant,

                                      v.

                          STATE OF FLORIDA,
                               Appellee.

                              No. 4D22-820

                             [June 28, 2023]

  Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit,
Martin County; Sherwood Bauer, Jr., Judge; L.T. Case No.
20000287CFAXMX.

   Arthur Ehrhardt, Stuart, pro se.

   Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Sorraya M. Solages-
Jones, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

   Arthur Ehrhardt appeals his plea of nolo contendere to false
imprisonment and sentence to twenty-four months’ probation. The record
does not indicate Ehrhardt ever attempted to withdraw his plea, nor does
the transcript of his plea hearing suggest Ehrhardt preserved his right to
appeal in any way. Without any contemporaneously reserved issue or a
preserved direct appeal under one of the four exceptions described in
Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.140(b)(2)(A)(ii)a.–d., any other
matters raised on appeal “must be preserved by a motion to withdraw a
plea before [those matters] may be raised on direct appeal.” Harriel v.
State, 710 So. 2d 102, 104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998).

   Ehrhardt neither reserved the right to appeal by contemporaneously
preserving an issue nor moved to withdraw the entry of his no contest plea.
Accordingly, we affirm pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure
9.315(a), which allows summary affirmance where an appellant fails to
demonstrate any basis for reversal after appealing under Rule 9.140. See
Leonard v. State, 760 So. 2d 114, 119 (Fla. 2000) (requiring district courts
summarily affirm, rather than dismiss, frivolous appeals after entry of a
nolo contendere plea). See also Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(b)(2)(A)(i)–(ii); Fla. R.
App. P. 9.135(a).

   Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., GROSS and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

                             *        *         *

   Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                                      2