DOUGLAS CURTIS MANN, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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.
Douglas Curtis Mann appealed the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief motion, challenging his negotiated plea agreements in several felony cases on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel and an improper basis for the pleas. The appellate court affirmed the denial, holding that Mann cannot repudiate plea contracts after accepting their benefits.
The court held that Mann's claims are not cognizable or are refuted by the record, and that Mann cannot disavow his negotiated plea contracts after accepting their benefits. The court found that counsel's representation was within the range of professionally competent assistance under Strickland v. Washington, and that conflicting accounts in depositions and continuance decisions are not proper grounds for post-conviction relief.
[1] A claim that conflicting accounts existed in depositions is not cognizable in a motion for post-conviction relief.
[2] Allegations of prejudice from continuances granted to the state are not cognizable on their merits if not supported by factual allegations.
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“After extensive negotiations, both as to guilt and sentence, the appellant entered into plea contracts with the state as to the charges for which he is bound.”
Establishes the binding nature of negotiated plea agreements and that Mann cannot later challenge them after accepting their benefits.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAfter extensive plea negotiations, Mann entered plea agreements in multiple felony cases (sexual battery, armed burglary, aggravated battery, and fals…
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
BARKDULL, Judge.
This is an appeal from the summary denial of a Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 motion. After extensive plea negotiations the defendant entered a plea of no contest in several felony cases in exchange for negotiated sentences. The negotiated pleas provided for the sentences in each case to run concurrently for a total of thirty-five (35) years, including three year minimum mandatory sentences, orders to pay restitution and the state’s agreement to nol pros other cases. Based upon his pleas the appellant was found guilty of sexual battery, armed burglary, aggravated battery, and false imprisonment.
The defendant filed a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 in the circuit court alleging an improper basis for the pleas where the accounts related in the depositions of Officers Harry Jones and Kenya Williams conflicted, prejudice in counsel’s allowing several continuances which enabled the state to find more evidence against the defendant, ineffective assistance of counsel, and that counsel did not devote sufficient time to prepare a defense.
Appellant’s first claim that conflicting accounts existed is not cognizable in a motion for post-conviction relief. See Whitlow v. State, 256 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971); Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 243, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 1712, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, 279 (1969). Furthermore, defense counsel stipulated to a prima facie case. The appellant’s second claim, that the granting of several continuances was prejudicial to his case, is not cognizable on its merits either, as appellant’s conclusions were not supported by any factual allegations. Dancy v. State, 175 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965). Appellant’s third claim, that counsel did not devote ample time to the preparation of a defense, is refuted by the transcript of the hearing, when the pleas were made. The colloquy clearly reflects that the defendant was facing a more onerous punishment than what he actually received. Counsel made a reasonable judgment call in this case and his representation now being challenged was not outside the range of professionally competent assistance. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).
After extensive negotiations, both as to guilt and sentence, the appellant entered into plea contracts with the state as to the charges for which he is bound. See Novaton v. State, 610 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Madrigal v. State, 545 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); Johnson v. State, 458 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Bell v. State, 453 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).. The appellant having accepted the benefits of his contracts cannot be allowed to disavow them at this time. See Scott v. State, 465 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Waldon v. State, 670 So. 2d 1155 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996)…in settlement of a pending charge. Having negotiated for, and accepted the benefit of, the state’s withdrawing the affidavit, Appellant should not now be heard to disavow her agreement. See Novaton v. State, 634 So. 2d 607 (Fla.1994); Mann v. State, 622 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); Madrigal v. State, 545 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). I also note that to hold otherwise deprives a probationer facing certain revocation and incarceration of the opportunity to negotiate a reasonable modification acceptable to t…
-
Allen v. State, 642 So. 2d 815 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…y of a sentence containing this condition of probation. Having accepted the benefits of his plea bargain, Mr. Allen will not be relieved of his burdens under the contract. See Novaton v. State, 634 So. 2d 607, 608 (Fla.1994); see also Mann v. State, 622 So. 2d 595, 596-97 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993) (affirming summary denial of Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 motion, court held that appellant would be bound by terms of plea contracts entered into after extensive negotiations as to both guilt and sentence). AFFIRMED. ALLEN and…
-
State v. Keydrick Dion Jordan, 630 So. 2d 1171 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…entitled to negotiate a plea, accept its benefit, and then ask the trial or appellate court to grant him a better deal than the one agreed to by the state. A defendant, irrespective of race, is bound by his own plea bargain. See also Mann v. State, 622 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1993) (defendant who accepts the benefit of a plea agreement cannot be allowed to disavow the agreement); Jolly v. State, 392 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (to allow a defendant to receive the benefit of his bargain and deny the state…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984)
- Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (U.S. 1969)
- Domingo Antonio Madrigal v. State, 545 So. 2d 392 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Bell v. State, 453 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984)
- Novaton v. State, 610 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Dancy v. State, 175 So. 2d 208 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Whitlow v. State, 256 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)
- Scott v. State, 465 So. 2d 1359 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- City OF Plantation & Mich. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Roberts, 458 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)