JESSICA CARTER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Jessica Carter appealed the denial of her motion to withdraw her guilty plea to second degree murder, claiming she was not advised of the elements of the crime. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction, finding that the plea colloquy record showed Carter was informed of the elements and that her plea was voluntary.
The court held that Carter's guilty plea was voluntary and knowing, as the transcript of the plea colloquy established that the elements of second degree murder were read to her and she affirmed voluntariness, and Carter failed to meet her burden of demonstrating that the plea was infected by misapprehension, undue persuasion, promise, mistake, fraud, inadvertence, ignorance, or incompetence.
[1] A defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea bears the burden of demonstrating that the plea was involuntary due to misapprehension, undue persuasion, promise, mistake,…
[2] A guilty plea is considered voluntary when the defendant affirms its voluntariness during the plea colloquy and the elements of the crime are read to the defendant.
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The transcript of the plea colloquy adequately illustrates that she answered in the affirmative as to the voluntariness of the plea and that the elements of the crime of second degree murder (to which she stated that she was tendering her guilty plea) were read to her.”
Establishes that the record showed Carter was informed of the elements and confirmed voluntariness
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarter was indicted for first degree murder and initially pled not guilty with retained private counsel. After plea negotiations with the prosecution,…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Withdrawal Of Guilty Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Defendant, Jessica Carter, appeals the denial of her motion to withdraw her guilty plea to second degree murder on the ground that the plea was not freely or voluntarily tendered in that she was not advised as to the elements of the crime to which she entered her guilty plea.
Jessica Carter was indicted for first degree murder. She retained private counsel to represent her and initially pled not guilty. Subsequently, her counsel entered into plea negotiations with the prosecution; and upon counsel’s recommendation, Carter withdrew her not guilty plea and tendered a guilty plea to second degree murder. At the ensuing sentencing hearing, Carter, now represented by the office of the public defender, moved to withdraw her guilty plea and to reinstate her plea of not guilty. After hearing the testimony of Carter and her former counsel, the court denied the motion to withdraw and sentenced her to 10 years imprisonment.
The record reflects that Carter is a college student of average intellectual capacity. The transcript of the plea colloquy adequately illustrates that she answered in the affirmative as to the voluntariness of the plea and that the elements of the crime of second degree murder (to which she stated that she was tendering her guilty plea) were read to her. The voluntariness of her plea is further reflected by the testimony rendered by the defendant and her former privately retained counsel at the hearing on her motion to withdraw her guilty plea. Carter admitted shooting the victim. Her former counsel testified that although he recommended plea negotiations with the prosecution, he would still be willing to go to trial.
The burden is upon the defendant who moves to withdraw a previously tendered guilty plea to demonstrate that such plea was infected by her misapprehension, undue persuasion, promise, mistake, fraud, inadvertence or ignorance, or was entered by one not competent to know its consequence or was otherwise involuntary, or where it appears that the ends of justice .would be served by the withdrawal of such a plea. State v. Braverman, 348 So. 2d 1183 (Fla.3d DCA 1977).
Jessica Carter having failed to demonstrate any of the above reasons to set aside her previously tendered guilty plea to second degree murder, the judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.
Affirmed.
On petition for rehearing counsel for Ms. Carter has correctly pointed out that the specific legal elements of second degree murder were not read to her at the plea bargain hearing. Nevertheless, her former privately retained counsel at the hearing on her motion to withdraw testified that he explained the charges to her and the possibility of a plea bargain. We, therefore, adhere to the holding in our original decision.
Petition denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Livolsi v. State, 451 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)…. Nor is there any doubt he entered the plea to that count based on his best interest. The record, therefore, supports the trial court’s finding that appellant’s plea of convenience to count 2 was freely and voluntarily entered. See Carter v. State, 369 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Stovall v. State, 252 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971). While we therefore affirm the order of the court which denied appellant’s postconviction relief as to count 2, we nevertheless find it necessary to reverse and remand this ca…
-
Newton v. State, 513 So. 2d 1271 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…the state’s unwillingness to argue a point which would have very little practical significance. Newton had the burden before the trial court of establishing that his plea was entered through mistake, inadvertence or ignorance. See Carter v. State, 369 So. 2d 968 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); State v. Braverman, 348 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert. denied, 358 So. 2d 128 (Fla.1978). Other than the claims made by Newton’s attorney, Newton offered no evidence to the trial court to contradict the terms of his writte…
-
Linsey C. Hollis v. State, 374 So. 2d 1164 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…ty of the aforementioned statute and rule was not mentioned therein, we note two cases in which review by appeal has been allowed although the appellant had pled guilty in the trial court. Holmes v. State, 374 So. 2d 944 (Fla.1979); Carter v. State, 369 So. 2d 968 (Fla.3rd DCA 1979). In view of the foregoing, we deem it proper to consider the appeal on the merits. We have carefully considered appellant’s contentions and find them to be without merit. Appellant had the guidance of counsel, the meticulous inst…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Braverman, 348 So. 2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)