JAMES MORGAN, 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.
Morgan appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief after pleading no contest to first-degree murder and robbery. The court affirms denial of most claims but reverses and remands regarding whether Morgan was adequately informed of the mandatory 25-year minimum sentence requirement for his life sentence.
The court reverses the summary denial on the issue of whether Morgan was informed of the mandatory 25-year minimum sentence and remands for the trial court to examine the record or hold an evidentiary hearing on this specific issue. The court affirms denial of relief on the double jeopardy and ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
[1] A defendant may be entitled to withdraw a plea if not made aware of a mandatory minimum prison term associated with the sentence.
[2] Attachments to a postconviction motion, such as a plea colloquy transcript and a rights waiver form, do not necessarily refute specific allegations of the motion if they…
Previewing 2 of 5 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“If Morgan's assertion is correct, he may be entitled to withdraw his plea.”
Establishes that lack of knowledge regarding mandatory minimum sentences can support plea withdrawal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMorgan entered a plea of no contest to first-degree murder and robbery, receiving a life sentence and a concurrent 15-year term. Morgan claims he was …
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 No Contest Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
[*775] FRANK, Judge.
James Morgan appeals from the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
Morgan entered a plea of no contest to charges of first degree murder and robbery. He was sentenced to life and a concurrent fifteen year term. He now claims not to have been made aware that the murder sentence required a mandatory twenty-five year minimum prison term.* If Morgan’s assertion is correct, he may be entitled to withdraw his plea. See, e.g., Perez v. State, 449 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). In response to the motion the trial court attached the transcript of a plea colloquy and a rights waiver form signed by Morgan. The specific allegations of Morgan’s motion are not refuted by the attachments. Although the transcript and waiver form mention the minimum mandatory sentence, we do not find any indication that that sentence was explained to Morgan. Instead, it appears from the transcript and the waiver form that they relate to another, separate set of non-capital felony charges to which Morgan entered a plea for a guidelines sentence to run consecutively with the life sentence.
The remaining issues presented in Morgan’s motion are without merit, i.e., separate sentences for first degree felony murder and the underlying felony do not violate the constitutional proscription against double jeopardy, State v. Chapin, 486 So. 2d 566 (Fia.1986), and his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is facially deficient. We hold that the trial court properly denied relief on both these grounds.
Upon remand the trial court is directed to reexamine the files and records in this matter to ascertain whether they demonstrate that Morgan was informed he would be required to serve no less than twenty-five years as a part of his life sentence. If the records so indicate the court may again deny the motion, attaching whatever documentation it relies upon in reaching that conclusion. Otherwise the court is to conduct an evidentiary hearing on this one issue. If the court again denies the motion Morgan must file a notice of appeal within thirty days to obtain further appellate review.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
RYDER, A.C.J., and LEHAN, J., concur. *
§§ 775.082(1), 782.04(1), Fla.Stat. (1985).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Colon v. State, 619 So. 2d 34 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…that the court, when accepting a plea, “shall determine that [the defendant] understands ... the mandatory minimum penalty provided by law, if any.” Failure to warn about such consequences can render the plea involuntary. See, e.g., Morgan v. State, 513 So. 2d 774 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987). When appearing at sentencing Colon indicated he had not understood that the three-year minimum would have to be imposed. In fact the record before us contains no evidence of compliance with rule 3.172. Although Colon signed a w…
Authorities Cited
- Perez v. State, 449 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- State v. Chapin, 486 So. 2d 566 (Fla. 1986)