Case No: TT99-000412-XX & TT99-000413-XX

STANLEY HEUERMAN,

Appellant,

vs.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.
____________________________

This is an appeal from the county court of Highlands County, Judge Olin Shinholser presiding. Counsel for Appellant filed an initial brief in which he cited no meritorious grounds for appeal. Appellant, Stanley Heuerman, has filed a pro se brief in which he requests counsel, and raises two grounds for appeal. This court has jurisdiction. Fla. R. App. P. 9.030(c). The judgment and sentence are affirmed.

On May 8, 1999, a Polk County Sheriff’s deputy arrested Appellant for D.U.I. in Highlands County. Appellant refused to submit to a breath, urine or blood test. At trial, Appellant plead no contest to D.U.I. on May 8, 1999. The court discussed the fact that Appellant had one prior D.U.I. conviction, and a suspended license. (R. 34). In accepting the plea, the court sentenced Appellant to 90 days in jail with 60 days work release on the D.U.I.; plus 60 days to run concurrently for the suspended license; 30 day vehicle impound; fine and costs; and one year probation.

A matter not preserved by contemporaneous objection cannot be reviewed on appeal. § 924.051(3) Fla. Stat.(1999). An appellant may appeal an involuntary nolo plea only when he has expressly preserved the right to appeal. § 924.051(4) Fla. Stat. (1999); and Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(2)(b). Finally, after a full examination of all the proceedings, the court must appoint counsel only if it finds there is a meritorious basis for appeal. Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 771 (1967); In Re Appellate Court Response to Anders Briefs, 581 So. 2d 149, 151 (Fla. 1991).

Appellant alleges the sheriff lacked authority to stop him on a county road, and that he would not have accepted the plea agreement had he known of the forthcoming prosecution for probation violation. This court finds that Appellant’s factual objection is beyond the scope of review because it was not preserved for appeal. § 924.051(3) Fla. Stat. (1999). Similarly, Appellant cannot argue on appeal that his plea was involuntary because the record contains no objection to the plea, nor any attempt to withdraw it. § 924.051(4) Fla. Stat. (1999); and Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(2)(b).

This court has reviewed the record below and finds that it contains no meritorious basis for appeal. Accordingly, Appellant is not entitled to appointed counsel for appeal. However, Appellant may seek appointment of counsel should he choose to challenge the voluntariness of his plea in a post conviction motion. Gantt v. State, 714 so. 2d 1116, 1117 (Fla. 4^th DCA 1998).

Appellant cannot raise factual issues on appeal that were not preserved at trial. Appellant cannot appeal the voluntariness of his plea because his objection is not preserved in the record. Finally, because the court finds the issues raised by Appellant are without merit, and the record reflects no appealable error, Appellant is not entitled to appointed counsel for this appeal.

For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED that the judgment and sentence of the county court are AFFIRMED.

ORDERED February 2000.

Charles B. Curry

Chief Judge