DERICK HOSKINS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 a defendant cannot reasonably rely on counsel's sentencing advice if the court explicitly states during the plea colloquy that the defendant may serve the entire sentence.
Derick Hoskins sought postconviction relief, claiming his counsel erroneously advised him he would serve 65% of his sentence, when he would actually s…
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 Plea Colloquy cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Derick Hoskins appeals an order denying his motion for postconviction relief. He contends that he was erroneously advised by counsel that he would only be required to serve sixty-five percent of his sentence, whereas in reality he will have to serve eighty-five percent of his sentence. The trial court denied his postconviction motion to withdraw his plea, and defendant-appellant has appealed.
The trial court was entirely correct. At the plea colloquy Judge Platzer asked the following questions and received the following answers:
THE COURT: Has anybody made any representation to you as to how much time you will actually serve in the state penitentiary under your sentence?
THE DEFENDANT: No. THE COURT: So you understand that you may very well serve each and every day of your ten-year sentence?
THE DEFENDANT: Yes.
The plea colloquy thus conclusively refutes defendant’s claim.
As stated by the Florida Supreme Court, “A defendant who is informed by the court during the plea colloquy that he may have to serve every day of a ten-year sentence could hardly reasonably rely on counsel's advice to the contrary.” State v. Leroux, 689 So. 2d 235, 238 (Fla.1996); see also Resta v. State, 698 So. 2d 378, 379 (Fla. 3d DCA), review denied, 703 So. 2d 477 (Fla.1997).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Leroux, 689 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1996)
- Singletary v. Newgent, 698 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)
- Resta v. State, 698 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)