GREGORY ZAETLER, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1993-12-14
No. 93-1642
Before HUBBART and GERSTEN and GODERICH, JJ.
627 So. 2d 1328 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1993) Negative Treatment
Cited by 22 cases


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Because (1) the defendant Gregory Zaetler in the plea colloquy conducted below by the trial court testified that no promises had been made to him other than the plea-negotiated sentence promise which was honored, and (2) his counsel at the time took no issue with this sworn statement, we conclude that the files and records of the court conclusively refute the defendant’s belated claim in a post-conviction motion to vacate under Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.850 that defense counsel erroneously promised the defendant that he would receive provisional gain time on his plea-negotiated sentence and would serve only five years in prison on his thirty-year sentence. Accordingly, the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to vacate under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 without an evidentiary hearing; this result is not changed by the fact that an affidavit by defense counsel supporting this claim was attached to the motion to vacate because the plea colloquy statement of the defendant conclusively refutes both the motion and the incorporated affidavit. Fla. R.Crim.P. 3.850(d); State v. Weeks, 166 So. 2d 892 (Fla.1964); Simmons v. State, 611 So. 2d 1250, 1253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992).

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (11 total)

  • Hoch v. State, 679 So. 2d 847 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)
    …es what developed of record during that proceeding, he replied in the negative. At least one appellate court has determined that that answer during the colloquy forecloses a subsequent claim that the plea was involuntarily entered. Zaetler v. State, 627 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). We do not agree that such a broad-based question which identifies nothing specific about an attorney’s representation to the defendant about time actually anticipated to be served should necessarily bar a claim that affirmative m…
  • Steele v. State, 645 So. 2d 59 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
    …endant’s acknowledgment at his plea hearing that no “promises,” other than those referred to at the plea hearing, had been made to him by anyone. This inquiry and response is sufficient to support a summary denial of his claim. See Zaetler v. State, 627 So. 2d 1328 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), rev. denied, 639 So. 2d 984 (Fla.1994). However because gain time affects the length of a defendant’s incarceration, we agree with the second district in Carmichael v. State, 631 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994), which announced in…
  • Leroux v. State, 656 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995)
    …defendant’s acknowledgment at his plea hearing that no “promises,” other than those referred to at the plea hearing, had been made to him by anyone.1 645 So. 2d at 60; see also Colon v. State, 595 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). In Zaetler v. State, 627 So. 2d 1328, 1329 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), review denied, 639 So. 2d 984 (Fla.1994), a plea colloquy in which the defendant testified that no promises had been made to him “other than the plea-negotiated sentence promise” conclusively refuted the defendant’s belated…

Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw