ANTHONY J. MONTROSE, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 5th DCA | 1984-09-27
No. 84-813
DAUKSCH, SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.
456 So. 2d 571 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The transcription of the plea taking dialogue in this case is insufficient to establish the factual basis, as required by Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.172(a), for a plea of guilty to aggravated battery (§ 784.045(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1981)). The order summarily denying defendant’s 3.850 motion is reversed and this cause is remanded for a full adversary hearing and determination as to whether the underlying facts in this case as to the element of “great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement” are adequate to support the guilty plea. If the trial court finds the underlying facts to be insufficient in that regard, the trial court shall also make an inquiry into, and adjudication as to, the competency of the defense counsel who represented the defendant when he entered his plea of guilty.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DAUKSCH, SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Stone v. State, 547 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
    …an obligation to disclose a rebuttal witness to the defendant if the witness’s testimony is reasonably anticipated. Lucas v. State, 376 So. 2d 1149 (Fla.1979). This is true even though the witness is also listed by the defendant. See Keen v. State, 456 So. 2d 571 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). The failure to disclose such a witness, however, does not automatically require the exclusion of the witness s testimony. Instead, a Richardson hearing is required. Lucas, 376 So. 2d at 1151. While the trial court never expressly…
  • Story v. State, 589 So. 2d 939 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
    …18 So. 2d 1223, 1225 (Fla.3d DCA 1982). Moreover, relevant evidence should not be excluded unless no other remedy suffices. Cooper v. State, 336 So. 2d 1133 (Fla.1976), cert. denied, 431 U.S. 925, 97 S.Ct. 2200, 53 L.Ed.2d 239 (1977); Keen v. State, 456 So. 2d 571, 574 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Finally, we fail to see how the admission of this evidence would prove to be either confusing or misleading. Mrs. Story was not moving for the evidence to be admitted to inculpate Mr. Wilson or Mr. Cato in the present charg…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw