LARRY ROBERT JORDAN, PETITIONER,
v.
HARRY K. SINGLETARY, SECRETARY OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENTS
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.
Larry Robert Jordan petitioned for habeas corpus alleging illegal detention due to lack of notice of postconviction decisions and claims of ineffective assistance of counsel regarding his guilty plea and sentencing on robbery charges. The court denied the petition, finding that Jordan knowingly pleaded guilty to both counts as required by his plea agreement and that the trial court properly dismissed the grand theft count and sentenced him for robbery.
Jordan's petition for habeas corpus is denied. Jordan knowingly pleaded guilty to both robbery and grand theft as required by his plea agreement, understood that the grand theft count would be dismissed, and the trial court properly sentenced him on the robbery conviction.
[1] A writ of habeas corpus is not available to raise issues that could have been raised on direct appeal or in a prior postconviction motion.
[2] A defendant is deemed to understand the charges to which they are pleading guilty when the record demonstrates a clear understanding by all parties present at the hearing…
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“After a review of the transcript of the change of plea and sentencing hearing, we conclude that Jordan knew that he was pleading guilty to both the robbery and the grand theft charge.”
Establishes that Jordan had actual knowledge of the charges to which he pleaded guilty despite the trial judge's momentary verbal error.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJordan was charged with robbery (Count I) and grand theft (Count II). He entered a plea agreement to plead guilty to both counts in exchange for not b…
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 Sentencing Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Larry Robert Jordan has filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he is being illegally detained. Jordan has filed this petition because he and his counsel were not notified of decisions made on motions for postconviction relief and for correction of sentence. Jordan now wishes to raise these same issues in this petition. Jordan alleges that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to sentence him for robbery; he received ineffective assistance of counsel at the change of plea and sentencing hearing because his counsel entered pleas of guilty to both counts in violation of the plea agreement; and he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that his attorney failed to enforce the plea agreement.
The state charged Jordan with robbery (Count I) and grand theft (Count II). Jordan entered into a plea agreement whereby he would plead guilty to the two counts for the consideration that he would not be treated as a habitual violent felony offender. At the change of plea and sentencing hearing, the assistant state attorney notified the court that Jordan could be convicted of only the robbery and not the grand theft due to double jeopardy considerations. At one point during the hearing the trial judge misspoke and referred to the grand theft charge as Count I instead of Count II. After a review of the transcript of the change of plea and sentencing hearing, we conclude that Jordan knew that he was pleading guilty to both the robbery and the grand theft charge. It is evident from the transcript that all those present at the hearing understood that the court intended to dismiss the grand theft count and adjudicate Jordan guilty of robbery. The court then imposed a legal sentence thereon.
The petition for writ of habeas corpus is denied.
PARKER, A.C.J., and PATTERSON and ALTENBERND, JJ., concur.