CARL MONEY WATTS, JR.
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
Carl Money Watts, Jr. appealed a trial court's denial of his motion to withdraw his plea. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District, affirmed the lower court's decision, holding that the motion was facially insufficient and that the defendant's allegations were conclusively refuted by the record.
The trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion as facially insufficient, and the failure to appoint conflict-free counsel was not erroneous because Watts' allegations were conclusively refuted by the record. A defendant is bound by the statements he makes and answers he gives during the plea colloquy.
“It is beyond peradventure that a defendant is bound by the statements he makes and answers he gives to the trial court during the plea colloquy”
Establishes that a defendant cannot escape the consequences of statements made during a plea colloquy
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWatts filed a motion to withdraw his plea, which the trial court denied. The record contained a plea colloquy in which Watts made statements and gave …
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 Conclusively Refuted By The Record cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Toomer v. State, 410 So. 3d 709, 713–14 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (holding "that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Toomer's motion as facially insufficient or otherwise conclusively refuted by the record,” and “the failure to appoint conflict-free counsel was not erroneous, as Toomer's allegations were conclusively refuted by record,” and noting that "[i]t is beyond peradventure that a defendant is bound by the statements he makes and answers he gives to the trial court during the plea colloquy"); Saintiler v. State, 109 So. 3d 303, 305 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (affirming the summary denial of a defendant's motion to withdraw plea as the motion was “facially insufficient because [the defendant] did not set forth any factual basis to support his conclusory allegations"); Wendt v. State, 19 So. 3d 1024, 1026 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009) (“The need for appointment of conflictfree counsel does not arise, however, unless the defendant has alleged in his rule 3.170(1) motion facts constituting a conflict with the attorney who represented him at the time he entered the plea.").
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Watts v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)…PER CURIAM. [*2] Affirmed. See Toomer v. State, 410 So. 3d 709, 713–14 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (holding "that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Toomer's motion as facially insufficient or otherwise conclusively refuted by the record,” and “the failure to appoint conflict-free counsel was not er…
-
Francois v. State, 427 So. 3d 1150 (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)
Authorities Cited
- Makenson Saintiler v. State, 109 So. 3d 303 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013)
- Watts v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)