RICKY LEE GRAVES, 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.
Ricky Lee Graves, Jr. filed a pro se motion to withdraw his guilty plea after sentencing, alleging his trial counsel misadvised him. The trial court struck the motion because he was represented by counsel, but the Fourth District reversed, holding that when a defendant alleges counsel misconduct in a pro se pleading, the court must hold a hearing and appoint conflict-free counsel rather than simply dismissing the motion.
A trial court commits error by striking a pro se motion to withdraw plea as a nullity merely because the defendant was represented by counsel. When a defendant alleges that his attorney misadvised him, misrepresented the terms of the plea, or coerced him into entering a plea, the trial court must hold a limited hearing with the defendant, defense counsel, and the State present, and must either permit counsel to withdraw or appoint conflict-free counsel if an adversarial relationship appears to exist and the allegations are not conclusively refuted by the record.
[1] A defendant is entitled to the assistance of conflict-free counsel at a hearing on a motion to withdraw a guilty plea, even if the motion is filed pro se.
[2] A defendant's right to counsel extends to critical stages of a criminal proceeding, including hearings on motions to withdraw a guilty plea.
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“When a defendant files a pro se motion to withdraw plea alleging that his attorney misadvised him, misrepresented the terms of the plea, or coerced him into entering a plea, an adversarial relationship exists and the trial court should not strike the pleading as a nullity.”
Establishes the core principle that pro se motions alleging counsel misconduct must be treated seriously and cannot be summarily dismissed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAfter sentencing, Graves filed a pro se motion to withdraw his open court plea while still represented by counsel. He alleged that his attorney genera…
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 Adversarial Relationship Between Defendant And Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After sentencing and while represented by counsel, the defendant filed a timely pro se “Motion to Withdraw Open Court Plea” and “Motion for Appointment of Counsel During Motion to Withdraw Open Court Plea.” He claimed, inter alia, that his attorney generally misadvised him, including a failure to advise him of the dangers and consequences of entering an open plea. At a hearing, the court allowed defense counsel to withdraw and appointed the public defender for purposes of the defendant’s appeal. The court struck the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea on the grounds that he was represented by counsel. Because this was error, the state’s concession of error is well taken.
When a defendant files a pro se motion to withdraw plea alleging that his attorney misadvised him, misrepresented the terms of the plea, or coerced him into entering a plea, an adversarial relationship exists and the trial court should not strike the pleading as a nullity. “Rather, the trial court should hold a limited hearing at which the defendant, defense counsel, and the State are present. If it appears to the trial court that an adversarial relationship between counsel and the defendant has arisen and the defendant’s allegations are not conclusively refuted by the record, the court should either permit counsel to withdraw or discharge counsel and appoint conflict-free counsel to represent the defendant.” Sheppard v. State, 17 So. 3d 275, 286-87 (Fla. 2009). Based on Sheppard, we reverse and remand for the trial court to consider the defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea with the assistance of conflict-free counsel.
Reversed and remanded.
LEVINE, C.J., WARNER and GROSS, JJ., concur.