WILLIE PATRICK HUNTER, 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.
Willie Patrick Hunter appealed a summary denial of post-conviction relief asserting seven grounds for relief. The court reversed and remanded one claim regarding whether the trial court adequately advised Hunter of the consequences of habitualization when accepting his pleas of nolo contendere.
The court reversed and remanded on the habitualization claim because the attachments to the trial court's summary denial order did not conclusively refute Hunter's allegation. On remand, the trial court must either provide record portions refuting the claim or allow Hunter to withdraw his pleas and proceed to new pleas or trial.
[1] A trial court's summary denial of a motion for post-conviction relief must be reversed and remanded if the attachments to the order do not conclusively refute a claim.
[2] A trial court must advise a defendant of the consequences of habitualization when accepting open pleas of nolo contendere.
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“Although Mr. Hunter conceded that the state gave him proper notice of its intent to seek enhanced sentences, he alleged that the trial court, in accepting his pleas, failed to advise him of the consequences of habitualization as required by Ashley v. State”
Establishes the core issue: whether proper advisement of habitualization consequences was required when accepting guilty pleas
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHunter entered open pleas of nolo contendere to multiple criminal offenses. The trial court sentenced him to enhanced terms as a habitual violent felo…
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 Habitual Violent Felony Offender cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Willie Patrick Hunter appeals the trial court’s summary denial of a motion for post-conviction relief asserting seven grounds for relief. We reverse and remand as to only one of those claims.
Mr. Hunter entered open pleas of nolo contendere to multiple criminal offenses. The trial court later sentenced him to enhanced terms of imprisonment as a habitual violent felony offender as to some offenses and as a habitual felony offender as to other offenses. It directed that all sentences be served concurrently. Although Mr. Hunter conceded that the state gave him proper notice of its intent to seek enhanced sentences, he alleged that the trial court, in accepting his pleas, failed to advise him of the consequences of habitualization as required by Ashley v. State, 614 So. 2d 486 (Fla.1993). Because the attachments to the trial court’s order of summary denial do not conclusively refute this claim, we must reverse and remand for further proceedings in accord with Watson v. State, 661 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). On remand, if the trial court again summarily denies the motion, it must attach those portions of the record or files refuting this claim. If the allegations of this claim cannot be refuted by the record, Mr. Hunter should be allowed to withdraw his pleas and either enter new pleas or proceed to trial. We remind him, however, “ ‘that such a move would return him to the status quo ante, whereby he would face’ any appropriate sentence authorized by law should he subsequently be convicted.” Carmichael v. State, 631 So. 2d 346, 348 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (quoting Colon v. State, 586 So. 2d 1305, 1306 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)).
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for further proceedings with directions.
PARKER, Acting C.J., and PATTERSON and LAZZARA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Ashley v. State, 614 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 1993)
- Carmichael v. State, 631 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Colon v. State, 586 So. 2d 1305 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- Watson v. State, 661 So. 2d 72 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)