Citations
- 861 So. 2d 523
Full opinion text
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
ORFINGER and TORPY, JJ., concur.
SHARP, W., J., dissenting, with opinion.
SHARP, W., J.,
dissenting.
This is an Anders case. In my view, appellant has stated a potentially meritorious defense to his conviction and sentence — that he was forced to accept a plea to two cases (02-118 and 02-3804) or proceed to trial at a time when his trial counsel was not prepared because he had just been assigned the second case (02-3804), which the state intended to use at the trial in case number 02-1118. Thus the trial court may have abused its discretion by denying a continuance or the appellant’s motion to withdraw his plea. I would order appellant’s counsel to file a merit brief addressing that issue, and have this case proceed as a non-Anders case.
. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967).