HOWARD D. BAKER, 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.
Baker appeals the trial court's summary denial of his motion to withdraw a guilty plea for attempted sexual battery. The court held that the trial court erred by refusing to conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Baker was competent at the time he entered his plea, given medical evidence suggesting possible incompetency.
The trial court erred in summarily denying the motion. When sufficient indications of incompetency are presented, the trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the plea was voluntarily entered by one competent to understand the consequences of his plea.
[1] A defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea must demonstrate good cause, which may include mental weakness, mistake, surprise, misapprehension, fear, promise, or other…
[2] A motion to withdraw a guilty plea should not be summarily denied if there are sufficient indications of incompetency presented to the court.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“A defendant who deliberately pleads guilty to a criminal charge should not be allowed to withdraw his plea merely because he changes his mind. However, he should be permitted to do so if he files a proper motion and proves that the plea was entered under mental weakness, mistake, surprise, misapprehension, fear, promise, or other circumstances affecting his rights.”
Establishes the legal standard for withdrawal of guilty pleas—good cause is required, and competency issues may constitute such cause.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn July 30, 1980, Baker pleaded guilty to attempted sexual battery. In September 1980, he filed a motion to withdraw his plea, alleging he was not com…
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.
SCHOONOVER, Judge.
The sole issue on this appeal is whether the trial court erred in summarily denying the appellant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea without conducting an evidentiary hearing to determine if he was competent at the time he entered the plea. We agree with the appellant’s contention that he should have been allowed a hearing to determine if good cause for withdrawal of the plea existed under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(f).
A defendant who deliberately pleads guilty to a criminal charge should not be allowed to withdraw his plea merely because he changes his mind. However, he should be permitted to do so if he files a proper motion and proves that the plea was entered under mental weakness, mistake, surprise, misapprehension, fear, promise, or other circumstances affecting his rights. Pope v. State, 56 Fla. 81, 47 So. 487 (1908).
The withdrawal of a guilty plea should not be denied in any case where it is evident thát the ends of justice will best be served by permitting it. Jordan v. State, 107 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958).
On July 30, 1980, the appellant pled guilty to attempted sexual battery, and a presentence investigation was ordered.
On September 29, 1980, the appellant filed a motion to withdraw his plea. The motion alleged that evidence obtained subsequent to the entry of the plea, together with his physical condition prior to, during, and after the plea, indicated that he was not competent at the time the plea was entered. The motion also alleged that appellant did not realize he had tendered a plea of guilty until after he had done so, and he believed that he was innocent and desired to stand trial. He was subsequently examined and on October 29, 1980, filed medical reports based upon that examination. One of the reports indicated that the appellant was psychotic, demented, and not competent. The report did not state if the condition existed at the time of the plea.
The motion was summarily denied, and he was sentenced to five years imprisonment on December 18, 1980.
The appellee contends that the motion in this case was not sufficient because it did not set forth reasons to show that good cause existed to believe the guilty plea was not properly entered. However, there were sufficient indications of incompetency presented to the court in the motion and medical reports that an evidentiary hearing should have been held to determine if the plea was voluntarily entered into by one competent to know the consequences of his plea. Alleluio v. State, 338 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).
We reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent herewith.
SCHEB, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (17 total)
-
Robinson v. State, 761 So. 2d 269 (Fla. 1999)…ermitted to withdraw a plea “if he files a proper motion and proves that the plea was entered under mental weakness, mistake, surprise, misapprehension, fear, promise, or other circumstances affecting his rights” (emphasis supplied). Baker v. State, 408 So. 2d 686, 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Id. at 634. In order to show cause why the plea should be withdrawn, mere allegations are not enough; the defense must offer proof that the plea was not voluntarily and intelligently entered. See Gore v. State, 552 So. 2d 1…
-
Tanzi v. State, 964 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 2007)…d to withdraw a plea “if he files a proper motion and proves that the plea was entered under mental weakness, mistake, surprise, misapprehension, fear, promise, or other circumstances affecting his rights” (emphasis supplied). [*114] Baker v. State, 408 So. 2d 686, 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Id. at 274 (emphasis omitted) (quoting Yesnes v. State, 440 So. 2d 628, 634 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)). At the trial level, “[i]n order to show cause why the plea should be withdrawn, mere allegations are not enough; the defense…
-
Yesnes v. State, 440 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…rmitted to withdraw a plea “if he files a proper motion and proves that the plea was entered under mental weakness, mistake, surprise, misapprehension, fear, promise, or other circumstances affecting his rights ” (emphasis supplied). Baker v. State, 408 So. 2d 686, 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). The uncontroverted testimony before the court below was no doubt sufficient to warrant allowing defendant to withdraw the nolo contendere plea. Defendant’s testimony was sufficiently corroborated by the doctor, under questi…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 17 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pope v. State, 56 Fla. 81 (Fla. 1908)
- Jordan v. State, 107 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- Alleluio v. State, 338 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)