TIMOTHY COLDING, 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.
Timothy Colding appeals the denial of his postconviction motion, challenging whether he received adequate representation when counsel allegedly coerced him to plead guilty despite his claims of innocence and without an adequate factual basis for the plea. The court reversed because the trial court failed to establish that a factual basis for the guilty plea was adequately developed on the record.
The court held that Colding's motion presents a viable question regarding inadequate counsel representation. The trial court's summary denial was improper because the record did not demonstrate that the court satisfied itself that a factual basis existed for the plea, and when no evidence or testimony is presented to establish this, the prejudice requirement for an ineffective assistance claim is met.
[1] A defendant's motion for postconviction relief may present a question of whether the defendant was adequately represented by trial counsel when alleging counsel persuaded…
[2] A court must satisfy itself that a guilty plea is voluntary and that a factual basis exists for the plea before accepting it.
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“When no evidence is presented, nor testimony given to the court for it to comply with the duty to satisfy itself that the plea was voluntary, the burden to show prejudice by counsel's actions is met.”
Establishes that absence of factual basis evidence satisfies the prejudice requirement for ineffective assistance claims
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceColding asserts he informed trial counsel of his innocence regarding the sexual battery charge. Counsel allegedly indicated he believed Colding did no…
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 Factual Basis For Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Timothy Wayne Colding appeals the trial court’s summary denial of his motion for posteonviction relief. We hold that, on its face, Colding’s motion presents a question of whether he was adequately represented by trial counsel. It is asserted that Colding was persuaded by his counsel to enter a plea of guilty when there existed no factual basis to support the plea. We reverse and remand.
In his motion, Colding states that he informed counsel of his innocence. Allegedly, counsel indicated he believed that Colding did not commit the sexual battery as charged. However, counsel insisted that it was in Colding’s best interest to accept the negotiated agreement and to plead guilty. The plea agreement was altered at the plea hearing. The typed statement acknowledging guilt has been stricken and a handwritten notation states that the plea of guilty was entered as it was “in [Colding’s] best interest to do so.”
A review of the transcripts of the plea colloquy and sentencing hearings reveal that Colding did not admit committing the sexual battery. Defense counsel did not stipulate to a factual basis for the plea and the state did not present any testimony concerning the charges. The portions of the record attached to the trial court’s order do not demonstrate that the court questioned whether a factual basis existed for the plea entered.
Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.172(a) requires that before the court accepts a plea, it must satisfy itself that the plea is voluntary and that a factual basis exists for the plea. Generally, the failure of the court to make a complete inquiry, or to receive a complete proffer concerning the factual basis for the plea will not result in reversal without a corresponding showing of prejudice. Gust v. State, 558 So. 2d 450, 454 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990). When no evidence is presented, nor testimony given to the court for it to comply with the duty to satisfy itself that the plea was voluntary, the burden to show prejudice by counsel’s actions is met. Gust, 558 So. 2d at 454; see Baker v. State, 620 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998).
We reverse and remand this matter to the trial court to conduct an evidentiary hearing in accordance with this opinion; or in the alternative, to attach those portions of the record demonstrating that the court satisfied itself that a factual basis exists for the plea. In all other respects the order denying the motion for postconviction relief is affirmed.
Reversed and remanded.
RYDER, A.C.J., and HALL and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Blalock v. Rice, 707 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…based upon her incarcerative status at the time she faded to pay or appear in court overcomes the requirement to show prejudice as a condition precedent to obtaining rehef based on the lack of a factual basis to support a plea. See Colding v. State, 638 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Fla. R.Crim. P. 3.172(i). With no record to rebut her claim, this court would have no alternative but to vacate her plea and adjudication. See Koenig v. State, 597 So. 2d 256 (Fla.1992). II. Waiver of Attorney The form utEized…
-
Farran v. State, 694 So. 2d 877 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)…trial counsel. He alleges sufficient prejudice to state a cognizable claim for relief, asserting that there was no evidence to link him to these crimes and that their inclusion in his guideline scoresheet affected his sentence. See Colding v. State, 638 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (explaining that the failure of a trial court to receive a complete proffer con-eeming the factual basis for the plea will not result in reversal without a corresponding showing of prejudice). In response to Farran’s allegation,…
-
Nealy v. State, 775 So. 2d 365 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…he battery charge was referenced by the trial court. Because nothing in the record before this court reflects that the trial court determined a factual basis existed for Nealy’s plea, the trial court must reconsider this issue. See Colding v. State, 638 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994). If the court again summarily denies the claim, the court should attach those portions of the record that conclusively refute Nealy’s allegations. Otherwise, the trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing on the issue. Affi…
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
- Gust v. State, 558 So. 2d 450 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)
- Baker v. State, 620 So. 2d 1122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)