ERNEST THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Rule 3.850 Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, pursuant to Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(g), having taken this appeal from the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 and this court having considered the record presented and having further determined that it conclusively appears therefrom that petitioner is entitled to no relief, the denial of his motion is affirmed.
[*105] SCHWARTZ, Judge
(dissenting).
Thomas’ rule 3.850 motion was based on the claim that he was under the influence of psychotropic medicine when he pled guilty to first degree murder in 1973.
The record indicates that this issue was specifically raised when the plea was entered. Compare, Dixon v. State, 252 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971).
The transcript of the colloquy, however, is internally contradictory on several key issues. On at least two occasions, Thomas avowed that he understood the proceedings completely; on another, he stated, “I don’t understand anything today.” Similarly, he told the court both that he had and that he had not taken the drugs in question on the day of the plea. I do not believe, therefore, that it can be said that the record shows “conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief.” Fla.R.App.P. 9.140(g).
See, State v. Weeks, 166 So. 2d 892, 897 (Fla.1964); Campi v. State, 371 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Estrella v. State, 215 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968).
Accordingly, I would reverse the order below and remand the cause for an evidentiary hearing. Coates v. United States, 273 F. 2d 514 (D.C.Cir.1959); see, Manley v. United States, 396 F. 2d 699 (5th Cir. 1968).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cherin v. S. Star Land & Cattle Co., Inc., 400 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 1981)…PER CURIAM. The District Court of Appeal, Third District, in Cherin v. Southern Star Land and Cattle Company, Inc., 390 So. 2d 104 (Fla.3d DCA 1980), affirmed an order of the trial court striking the plaintiff’s class action claim for fraud. The district court cited as authority for its affirmance Frankel v. City of Miami Beach, 340 So. 2d 463 (Fla.1976), and Osceola Groves, In…
-
Lance v. Wade, 424 So. 2d 161 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…sapproved class actions for fraud. Furthermore, in Cherin v. Southern Star Land & Cattle Co., 400 So. 2d 1 (Fla.1981), the court declined to answer the certified question presented by the appellate court in Cherin v. Southern Star Land & Cattle Co., 390 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) or to overrule Osceola Groves. The doubt expressed by the supreme court in Frankel regarding adherence to the rule enunciated in Osceola Groves, and Justice England’s comments in his dissent in Avila South Condominium, suggest a…
-
Thomas v. State, 402 So. 2d 18 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…al and are hereby summarily denied on the authority of Doerr v. State, 275 So. 2d 592 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973); Clements v. State, 310 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Neal v. State, 349 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977). Affirmed. . See: Thomas v. State, 390 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980).…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Weeks, 166 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 1964)
- Coates v. United States, 273 F.2d 514 (D.C. Cir. 1959)
- Baird Everett Manley v. United States, 396 F.2d 699 (5th Cir. 1968)
- Estrella v. State, 215 So. 2d 489 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Dixon v. State, 252 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)
- Aldo Campi v. State, 371 So. 2d 1085 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)