D.V.L., A CHILD, 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.
The court held that the juvenile's plea colloquy was inadequate, requiring an opportunity to withdraw her plea to escape charges and reversal of the burglary adjudication.
A juvenile pleaded guilty to one escape charge without being informed of her rights and admitted a second escape charge without a plea being taken. Th…
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 Escape cases and more on FLexlaw
FRANK, Judge.
D.V.L. appeared before a juvenile judge at a combination arraignment and disposition hearing to face charges in three petitions: two charged her with escape and one with burglary. At the first part of the hearing, D.V.L. entered a guilty plea to one of the escape charges. The trial judge, however, requested her plea without informing her of any of her rights set out in Florida Rule of Juvenile Procedure 8.075. In a later part of the hearing, D.V.L. admitted the second escape charge, -but no plea was taken. In neither part of the hearings did there appear any mention of a plea on the burglary charge. Nevertheless, the judge adjudicated D.V.L. delinquent of all three charges and committed her to a level eight facility.
This record reflects that D.V.L.’s primary purpose was to contest the disposition rather than the charges. That concern notwithstanding, the plea colloquy was woefully inadequate in this case. D.V.L. was never really informed of the nature of the charges or of the effect flowing from her no contest plea, nor is it clear from the record that her plea was knowing and voluntary. It appears that she has never entered a plea to the burglary charge.
When the record fails to reflect a determination by the trial court that the juvenile has entered a plea voluntarily and with an understanding of the nature of the allegations, remand is appropriate. G.M.K. v. State, 312 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). In this case D.V.L. must be given an opportunity to withdraw her plea to the escape charges. See D.D.W. v. State, 686 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). The burglary charge, for which no plea was ever entered, must be reversed.
Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
DANAHY, A.C.J. and ALTENBERND, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
A.D.W. v. State, 777 So. 2d 1101 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)…into a plea agreement due to the requirement that a plea to waive any constitutionally protected right must be knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered into by the defendant with an adequate inquiry by the trial court. See D.V.L. v. State, 693 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997); Koenig v. State, 597 So. 2d 256 (Fla.1992). Therefore, this court grants A.D.W.’s petition for a writ of prohibition. The trial [*1105] court shall hold an adjudicatory hearing for the petitioner on the charge of sexual battery…
-
A.M. v. State, 723 So. 2d 383 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…d plea, without conducting an adequate inquiry into his comprehension of the waiver of counsel or of the voluntariness of his guilty plea. The State correctly concedes error. See J.R.V. v. State, 715 So. 2d 1135 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998); D.V.L. v. State, 693 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA [*384] 1997). We therefore remand this cause for further proceedings and do not reach the other issues AM. has raised. Reversed. QUINCE and CASANUEVA, JJ., Concur.…
-
E.L. v. State, 720 So. 2d 280 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…to withdraw his plea contending that he misunderstood the results of his earlier plea. The successor judge had no reason to know the major deficiencies in the prior hearing and declined to permit the withdrawal of the plea. As in D.V.L. v. State, 693 So. 2d 693 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997), the plea colloquy is legally inadequate. The record affirmatively discloses that no inquiry was made that comports with rule 8.080. See Parr v. State, 415 So. 2d 1353 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Reversed and remanded for further proce…
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
- Rennolds v. Rennolds, 312 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
- G. M. K. v. State, 312 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)
- D.D.W. v. State, 686 So. 2d 747 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997)