MICHAEL MASELLI, 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.
Michael Maselli appealed the revocation of his probation based on a conviction entered through a nolo contendere plea. The Florida Second District Court of Appeal affirmed the revocation, holding that a valid conviction from a nolo contendere plea is a sufficient basis for probation revocation, regardless of whether the defendant later asserts innocence.
A conviction entered upon a nolo contendere plea is a sufficient basis for probation revocation standing alone. A defendant's later assertion of innocence does not invalidate the conviction or preclude revocation, though a defendant may attempt to assert innocence when arguing against revocation.
[1] A judgment of guilt entered upon a nolo contendere plea, standing alone, is a sufficient basis to revoke probation.
[2] A conviction for a crime is a sufficient basis for probation revocation.
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“It is well settled that the conviction of a crime is a sufficient basis for a probation revocation.”
Establishes the controlling legal principle that any valid conviction can support probation revocation
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was charged with violating a probation condition requiring him to live and remain at liberty without violating any law. The state introduced…
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 Factual Basis For Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
GRIMES, Acting Chief Judge.
Appellant was charged with violating a condition of his probation which required him to live and remain at liberty without violating any law. At the hearing, the state introduced a certified copy of a judgment finding appellant guilty of uttering a forged instrument which was entered upon a plea of nolo contendere. The state then interrogated appellant concerning the crime, and he admitted that he had pled nolo contendere to the charge. He did not explain the details of his plea nor assert his innocence. The court revoked appellant’s probation.
Appellant contends that a judgment of guilt entered upon a nolo contendere plea constitutes an insufficient basis upon which to revoke his probation. He refers to Donaldson v. State, 407 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), in which a majority of the panel held that a probation revocation cannot be predicated solely upon a conviction entered pursuant to a plea of nolo contendere where the defendant maintains his innocence of the crime.
At the outset, we note that the facts of Donaldson are distinguishable. In Donaldson, the defendant asserted that he had pled nolo contendere pursuant to a plea bargain and that he had always maintained his innocence of the crime. Here, appellant made no explanation concerning his plea and never asserted that he was not guilty. However, we prefer to meet the issue head-on. With due respect, but without apology, we disagree with the majority opinion of our sister court in Donaldson. We prefer the reasoning of Judge Cobb in his dissent.
It is well settled that the conviction of a crime is a sufficient basis for a probation revocation. Franklin v. State, 356 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); Demehak v. State, 351 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Egantoff v. State, 208 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968). The fact that the defendant may have pled nolo contendere does not detract from the legality of his conviction. Before a judge can accept a plea of nolo contendere, he must satisfy himself that the plea is voluntarily entered and that there is a factual basis for it. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.172(a). There may be many reasons why a defendant chooses to enter a plea of nolo contendere, but if a judgment of guilt is entered upon the plea we must assume that the conviction is valid unless it has been set aside. We do not suggest that in trying to convince the court not to revoke his probation a defendant should be precluded from asserting his innocence of the charge to which he pled nolo contendere. We hold only that the conviction, standing alone, is sufficient to sustain the court’s decision to revoke probation.
AFFIRMED.
SCHEB and LEHAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maselli v. State, 446 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 1984)…BOYD, Justice. This case is before us on petition for review of the decision in Maselli v. State, 425 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983). We granted review of the case on the ground of conflict of decisions. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. Petitioner was on probation when he was charged with uttering a forged instrument. He pleaded nolo contendere to the charge and…
-
Pierluigi Mancini v. State, 448 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…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 in accepting the defendant’s plea. It is, therefore, clear that the basis of the charge was the substance f…
-
Grizzard v. State, 881 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…n a nolo contendere plea, standing alone, can constitute a sufficient basis upon which to revoke probation. Maselli v. State, 446 So. 2d 1079 (Fla.1984). In Maselli, the supreme court, in approving the Second District’s decision in Maselli v. State, 425 So. 2d 176 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), explained: The judge may rely on the conviction even if it was imposed pursuant to a plea of nolo contendere. A plea of nolo con-tendere relieves the state of its burden of proving the factual allegations of the indictment or in…
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
- Egantoff v. State, 208 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)
- Demchak v. State, 351 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Franklin v. State, 356 So. 2d 1352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978)
- Donaldson v. State, 407 So. 2d 623 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)