JESSE LIVINGSTON, APPELLANT,
v.
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.
Jesse Livingston, convicted of first-degree murder after pleading guilty, appealed the summary denial of his motion to vacate judgment and sentence under Rule 3.850 on grounds of insanity and ineffective assistance of counsel. The court reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the insanity claim, finding that the plea hearing record did not refute the allegation that appellant had been adjudged insane in 1961 with no showing of restored sanity.
The court reversed the summary denial and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the insanity allegation. The record sufficiently raised a genuine issue of material fact regarding insanity that, if true, would entitle appellant to relief, though the ineffective assistance claim was refuted by the plea hearing transcript showing appellant's satisfaction with counsel.
[1] An accused cannot be tried or sentenced while insane.
[2] A person previously adjudged insane is presumed to remain so until it is shown that their sanity has returned.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“One who has been adjudged insane is presumed to continue so until it is shown that his sanity has returned”
Establishes the legal presumption regarding insanity that governs the case
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant pled guilty to first-degree murder in October 1978 pursuant to a plea bargain and was sentenced to life imprisonment. Appellant alleged he h…
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 Presumption Of Continuing Insanity cases and more on FLexlaw
BOARDMAN, Judge.
Jesse Livingston appeals the summary denial of his motion to vacate his judgment and sentence for first-degree murder. We reverse for an evidentiary hearing.
Appellant pled guilty to first-degree murder in October 1978, pursuant to a plea bargain and was sentenced to life in prison. He now seeks vacation of his judgment and sentence, pursuant to Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, on two grounds: (1) that he was found to be insane in 1961, and there has been no showing that his sanity has returned, and (2) that his court-appointed counsel was ineffective in that counsel failed to request a sanity hearing after having been informed that appellant had been declared insane and had been committed to Florida State Hospital at Chattahoochee, where he was a patient during 1961 and 1962. Appellant further alleged that his counsel had induced him to plead guilty by telling him that if he did not plead guilty, he would be convicted at trial and séntence to death.
The transcript of the plea hearing, upon which the trial court apparently relied in denying appellant’s motion, indicates that appellant stated that he had not been threatened or promised anything other than the plea agreement in order to get him to plead guilty, and he expressed satisfaction with the services of his attorney. Thus the record refutes appellant’s allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel.
However, nothing in the plea hearing transcript, which is the only portion of the record before us, refutes appellant’s insanity allegation. Appellant’s mental condition was not mentioned at any point in the plea hearing. This allegation, if true, would entitle appellant to relief. One who has been adjudged insane is presumed to continue so until it is shown that his sanity has returned, Horace v. Culver, 111 So. 2d 670 (Fla.1959); Hixon v. State, 165 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964), and an accused cannot be tried or sentenced while insane. Horace v. Culver, supra; Alexander v. State, 380 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
Accordingly, the trial court’s order summarily denying appellant’s motion to vacate is REVERSED and the cause REMANDED with directions to hold an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s insanity allegation.
GRIMES, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jones v. State, 421 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…et to be adjudicated competent to stand trial. Once an individual is adjudicated incompetent, it is presumed that he remains so until otherwise adjudicated, and he cannot be tried or sentenced while he remains in such condition. Livingston v. State, 383 So. 2d 947 (Fla.2d DCA 1980). Because Jones had been adjudicated incompetent, and had never subsequently been adjudicated competent, we distinguish the facts in the case at bar, as well as in Livingston, from those in Bryant v. State, 373 So. 2d 380 (Fla.lst D…
-
Savage v. State, 530 So. 2d 1077 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…subsequent to the plea or trial, when it appears the record does not satisfactorily resolve the allegations of incompetency. Blanco v. Wainwright, 507 So. 2d 1377 (Fla.1987); Campbell v. State, 488 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986); Livingston v. State, 383 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). In circumstances somewhat analogous to those present in the instant case, in Campbell v. State, supra, the court found an evidentiary hearing was required. In Campbell, the prisoner alleged his guilty plea was not entered with f…1 / 2
-
Livingston v. State, 415 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)…DANAHY, Judge. When this case was before us for the first time, we remanded it to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s insanity allegation. Livingston v. State, 383 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). Experts were appointed and the hearing was held. Now appellant argues that the evidence presented to the trial court at the hearing fell short of compliance with the new Rules of Criminal Procedure mandated for use in determinin…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Horace v. Culver, 111 So. 2d 670 (Fla. 1959)
- Hixon v. State, 165 So. 2d 436 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Alexander v. State, 380 So. 2d 1188 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)