ROBERT HAYNES, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed summary denial of post-conviction relief motion where defendant alleged his nolo contendere plea was coerced by his public defender and entered without adequate explanation or effective assistance of counsel.
Summary denial of a Rule 3.850 motion was error where the allegations, if true, might entitle the defendant to relief, requiring either attachment of conclusive record portions or an evidentiary hearing.
[1] A trial court must either attach portions of the record conclusively showing no relief is warranted or conduct an evidentiary hearing when a Rule 3.850 motion alleges fac…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHaynes pleaded nolo contendere and later filed a post-conviction motion alleging his plea was coerced by his public defender's threat of a lengthy sen…
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 Coerced Guilty Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
JOANOS, Judge.
Haynes appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. His motion alleged in part that his plea of nolo contendere was coerced by his public defender with a threat of a lengthy sentence. He also alleged that he was denied effective assistance of counsel because he was incarcerated for four months and saw his lawyer only once during that time period; and his lawyer frightened him so that he incriminated himself by pleading to charges based on weak evidence. Finally, appellant alleged that his plea of nolo contendere was not entered voluntarily because his lawyer had not explained to him all the factors involved in the plea bargain. Appellant’s motion is marginal insofar as the inclusion of sufficient facts to support the motion is concerned. Nevertheless, the allegations, if true, might entitle appellant to the .relief sought. Therefore, it was error for the trial court to summarily deny the motion, and this cause is reversed and remanded with directions to the trial court to attach portions of the record which conclusively show that appellant is entitled to no relief or to conduct an evidentiary hearing on the allegations presented in the motion.
REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions.
SMITH and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Simmons v. State, 485 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)…that choice Simmons accepted the one-year sentences. We hold that Simmons’ statement of facts, if true, would present a prima facie showing of his entitlement to relief. Coercion by counsel may render a plea involuntary. See, e.g., Haynes v. State, 451 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Further, if Simmons did apprise counsel of a possible illegal search or speedy trial violation, and counsel refused to follow up on this information, such delinquency could constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. Since th…
-
Edmond Boris Shell v. State, 501 So. 2d 1332 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…telling Shell if he did not go along with the plea he would get a five-year sentence and the attorney would withdraw from Shell’s case. If these allegations of coercion are true, then Shell’s plea may have been involuntary. Simmons; Haynes v. State, 451 So. 2d 1043 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). The trial court may have considered Shell’s motion for post-conviction relief to be sufficient on its face, but did not attach any record to his denial order to refute Shell’s claim as required by rule 3.850. Although the judge…