JOSEPH A. WEBSTER, 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.
Joseph Webster appeals a summary denial of his postconviction motion claiming ineffective assistance of counsel. Webster alleges his public defender mistakenly advised him that alcohol consumption alone was sufficient to support a manslaughter conviction, causing him to plead guilty based on that misadvice. The appellate court reverses the summary denial and remands for further proceedings.
The court held that Webster's sworn allegations of affirmative misadvice concerning the essential elements of manslaughter constitute a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, and that the statements made during the plea colloquy do not conclusively refute these allegations.
[1] Affirmative misadvice from counsel regarding the elements of a crime can constitute ineffective assistance of counsel, even if the defendant states they are entering a pl…
[2] A sworn motion for postconviction relief alleging that defense counsel affirmatively misadvised the defendant that alcohol consumption alone was sufficient for a manslaug…
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“if counsel indeed informed him that consumption of alcohol in and of itself was sufficient to support a manslaughter conviction, such advice was erroneous”
Establishes that the alleged misadvice by counsel constitutes legal error
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWebster was involved in a shooting incident where his firearm accidentally discharged, killing a close friend, while Webster was legally intoxicated. …
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 Affirmative Misadvice cases and more on FLexlaw
KAHN, J.
Appellant, Joseph A. Webster, challenges the circuit court’s summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In his motion, and on appeal, Webster alleges ineffective assistance of counsel. His sworn motion contends that his assistant public defender failed to advise him that consumption of alcohol was, without more, insufficient to support a conviction for manslaughter by culpable negligence. Webster avers that defense counsel affirmatively advised him that “his consumption of alcohol alone was sufficient to convict him of manslaughter by culpable negligence, misrepresenting the essentials for a manslaughter conviction.” Webster claims that as a result of this misadvice, he entered his plea unknowingly and based on counsel’s misrepresentations. Had he not been so advised, he alleges that he would have gone to trial on the charge.
The tragic circumstances of the underlying incident reveal that the manslaughter victim was a close friend of Webster’s. According to the sworn motion, the victim “was shot while the defendant was in the process of inserting cartridges into his firearm.” Webster immediately advised authorities “that the firearm had been accidentally discharged, and inadvertently striking [sic] the victim.” Webster was legally intoxicated at the time of the incident. He claims that “the firearm discharged accidentally” and is unaware of any fact, other than his intoxication, to support the charge of culpable negligence.
The claim of ineffective assistance is not refuted by the attachments to the order on appeal. We certainly do not pass on the veracity of Webster’s sworn allegations, but if counsel indeed informed him that consumption of alcohol in and of itself was sufficient to support a manslaughter conviction, such advice was erroneous. See Walsingham v. State, 272 So. 2d 215, 216 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973).
Neither the written plea agreement, nor the plea colloquy at tached to the order, conclusively refute the allegations in the sworn 3.850 motion. As noted by the lower court, Webster agreed he was entering his plea freely and voluntarily, and he stated he was satisfied with his attorney’s representation. He also stated on the record that he pled guilty “because he was guilty.” These statements did not, however, conclusively refute, or even adequately meet, the present allegations of affirmative misadvice concerning the proof necessary to support the elements of the crime with which appellant was charged. Cf. Little v. State, 673 So. 2d 151, 151 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996) (“Little asserted that his counsel affirmatively misadvised him as to his provisional gain time credit eligibility and as to the length of time he would actually serve on his negotiated twenty-five year sentence. He asserts that he only entered his plea because of this misadvice. These allegations sufficiently allege a colorable claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.”).
We REVERSE the summary denial of this claim and REMAND for further proceedings pursuant to the rule. We AFFIRM without discussion the remaining grounds given by the circuit court for denying the motion.
BENTON and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pitts v. State, 855 So. 2d 681 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…orm him of the elements of the charged crimes and remand with directions for the trial court to either hold an evidentiary hearing or to attach portions of the record conclusively refuting the appellant’s entitlement to relief. See Webster v. State, 744 So. 2d 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Marshall v. State, 540 So. 2d 921, 922 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). We certify conflict with Taylor v. State, 818 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) as to Appellant’s constitutional challenge that Chap. 99-188, Laws of Florida violates the…
-
Sapp v. State, 913 So. 2d 1220 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…d of care which a reasonable person would exercise that it constituted negligence of “a gross and flagrant character.” We are mindful that the mere consumption of alcohol is not sufficient to support a manslaughter conviction. See Webster v. State, 744 So. 2d 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999) (holding that the summary denial of a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was precluded where petitioner claimed that counsel misadvised him that consumption of alcohol alone was sufficient to convict him of manslaughter b…
-
Hill v. State, 258 So. 3d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018)…la. 1988) (citing Stano v. State, 520 So. 2d 278, 280 (Fla. 1988)). But a voluntary guilty plea will not refute a later claim that counsel misadvised the defendant to plead guilty, based on insufficient evidence of guilt. See Webster v. State, 744 So. 2d 1033, 1033 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). In Webster, the defendant claimed his attorney failed to advise him that alcohol consumption alone could not support a conviction for manslaughter by culpable negligence. Id. At the plea colloquy, the defendant stat…
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
- Little v. State, 673 So. 2d 151 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)
- Walsingham v. State, 272 So. 2d 215 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)