LOUIS SHANNON, 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.
Louis Shannon appealed the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, raising four grounds including denial of speedy trial rights, defective charging information, ineffective assistance of counsel, and lack of factual basis for his nolo contendere plea. The court affirmed dismissal of the first three claims but reversed and remanded on the fourth claim regarding the factual basis for the plea.
The court affirmed the summary denial of Shannon's first three claims (speedy trial denial, defective information, and ineffective assistance of counsel) as they were either previously raised or could have been raised on direct appeal. However, the court reversed on the fourth claim regarding factual basis for the plea, finding Shannon's allegations sufficient to survive summary denial and requiring either production of record evidence refuting his claim or an evidentiary hearing.
[1] Issues previously raised in a prior post-conviction motion or that could have been raised on direct appeal are not grounds for relief in a subsequent post-conviction moti…
[2] A court must determine that the circumstances surrounding a nolo contendere plea reflect a full understanding of its significance and voluntariness, and that there is a f…
Previewing 2 of 6 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“No plea of guilty or nolo contendere shall be accepted by a court without first determining, in open court, with means of recording the proceedings stenographically or by mechanical means, that the circumstances surrounding the plea reflect a full understanding of the significance of the plea and its voluntariness, and that there is a factual basis for the plea of guilty”
Establishes the mandatory requirement for trial courts to verify factual basis for guilty or nolo contendere pleas under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(j)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceShannon filed a motion for post-conviction relief alleging four grounds for relief. Regarding the fourth ground, Shannon alleged that there was no fac…
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 Florida Rule Of Criminal Procedure 3.170(J) cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Louis Shannon appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion for post-conviction relief, Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
Shannon alleged the following grounds for relief in his motion for post-conviction relief: (1) that he was denied his speedy trial rights; (2) that he was charged with a defective and misleading information; (3) that he had been denied effective assistance of counsel; and (4) that there was no factual basis for the trial court to accept his nolo contendere plea. The trial court summarily denied Shannon’s motion.
Issues (1), (2), and (3) are all issues which either have been raised in a previous motion for post-conviction relief or could have been raised on direct appeal. Accordingly, there is no basis for relief on these allegations. Shannon’s fourth allegation stands in a somewhat different posture. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(j) provides:
No plea of guilty or nolo contendere shall be accepted by a court without first determining, in open court, with means of recording the proceedings stenographically or by mechanical means, that the circumstances surrounding the plea reflect a full understanding of the significance of the plea and its voluntariness, and that there is a factual basis for the plea of guilty, (emphasis supplied)
The purpose of the underlined phrase is to insure that the facts of the case fit the offense for which the defendant was charged. Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975). It is intended to remedy an unwitting admission of guilt to a crime which the defendant did not commit. Bright v. State, 317 So. 2d 864 (Fla.4th DCA 1975). However, the defendant must demonstrate that he has been prejudiced or has suffered a manifest injustice by the particular guilty or nolo contendere plea procedure used in his case. Williams, supra. Here, Shannon alleged that there was no factual basis for the Court to accept his plea, that he denied commission of the crimes at the plea bargaining hearing, and that the judge accepted the plea anyway which he was not supposed to have done. We find that such an allegation is sufficient to survive the trial court’s summary denial of Shannon’s motion:
Where a defendant raises the possibility of a defense to his guilty plea, the potential prejudice is apparent. In such cir cumstances, a trial judge should make extensive inquiry into factual basis before accepting the guilty plea. Correspondingly, the showing in the record of the source of the factual information supporting the plea should be made with greater specificity. . . . (emphasis in original; citations omitted)
State v. Kendrick, 336 So. 2d 353, 355 (Fla.1976).
We therefore reverse and remand for the trial court to either attach those portions of the record effectively refuting Shannon’s claim or to afford him an evidentiary hearing on his allegation.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part, and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
SHAW and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bell v. State, 589 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…illiams v. State, 534 So. 2d 929 (Fla.1988). The requirement that a trial court ascertain the factual basis for a guilty plea is intended to preclude an unwitting admission of guilt for a crime the defendant did not in fact commit. Shannon v. State, 406 So. 2d 87, 88 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). As previously stated, the court did not make any inquiry whatsoever regarding a factual basis for Bell’s plea. We therefore cannot conclusively determine from Bell’s pro se brief whether Bell is now alleging that he did not…
-
Pierluigi Mancini v. State, 448 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…to accepting a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the trial court must receive in the record facts which support the elements of the offense to which the defendant has entered his plea. Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975); Shannon v. State, 406 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Waugh v. State, 388 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1980); Maselli v. State, 425 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1983). The facts presented by the prosecutor as a basis for the charge, as mentioned above, were relied upon by the trial judge i…
-
Hoover v. State, 511 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…ated.14 Jolly v. [*636] State, 392 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)15; State v. Vinson, 320 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975), aff'd, Vinson v. State, 345 So. 2d 711 (1977)16. See also Bright v. State, 317 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 4th DCA 1965)17; Shannon v. State, 406 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)18; Long v. State, 421 So. 2d 1089 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982)19. The attempt by the prosecutor in this case to find an offense to which appellant could be persuaded to plead, and for which he could be sentenced to a substantial term of y…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1975)
- State v. Bunyan L. Kendrick, Jr., 336 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 1976)
- Borri v. Siverson, 336 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 1976)
- Bright v. State, 317 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)