J.M.B., 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.
J.M.B., a juvenile adjudicated delinquent in multiple cases, appealed contesting the voluntariness of his guilty pleas and claiming inadequate plea colloquies. The court held that while the plea colloquies were inadequate, a juvenile cannot challenge plea voluntariness on direct appeal without first moving to withdraw the plea, but may pursue habeas corpus relief.
A juvenile cannot challenge the voluntariness of a plea on direct appeal without first moving to withdraw the plea. The conflict of interest claim was affirmed without discussion. However, a juvenile may challenge plea voluntariness through petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court.
[1] A juvenile may not challenge the voluntariness of a guilty plea on direct appeal without first moving to withdraw the plea in the trial court.
[2] A writ of habeas corpus is the proper avenue for a juvenile to challenge the voluntariness of a guilty plea.
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“a juvenile may not challenge the voluntariness of his plea on direct appeal without first moving to withdraw the plea”
Establishes the procedural requirement that must be followed before a juvenile can raise plea voluntariness issues on direct appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJ.M.B. was adjudicated delinquent in numerous cases and committed to the Department of Juvenile Justice at commitment level 10 followed by community c…
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 Adjudication Of Delinquency cases and more on FLexlaw
NORTHCUTT, Judge.
This appeal involves numerous cases in which J.M.B. was adjudicated delinquent. In all cases he was committed to the Department of Juvenile Justice at commitment level 10, followed by community control. One of the cases went to trial, and in that case J.M.B. claims the court failed to determine whether he voluntarily waived his counsel’s potential conflict of interest. We find no merit in his argument, and affirm without discussion. In the other cases, J.M.B. contends that the court did not properly determine whether his guilty pleas were voluntary. As we will explain, this issue cannot be raised on direct appeal because J.M.B. did not ask to withdraw his plea. We affirm without prejudice to his filing a petition for writ of habeas corpus.
J.M.B.’s challenge to the voluntariness of his pleas is grounded on his assertion that the circuit court did not conduct an adequate plea colloquy. In a juvenile proceeding, the court is required to follow a set procedure in determining whether to accept a plea. See Fla. R. Juv. P. 8.080.
We agree that the plea colloquy was inadequate. But our review of the statutes and rules applicable to appeals in juvenile delinquency cases leads us to the conclusion that a juvenile may not challenge the vol- untariness of his plea on direct appeal without first moving to withdraw the plea.
Section 985.234, Florida Statutes (1995), states that appeals of juvenile delinquency-cases are taken in the time and manner prescribed by the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Under rule 9.145, appeals in delinquency cases follow rule 9.140, except as modified by rule 9.145.
Rule 9.145(b), which addresses appeals by a child, does not mention appeals from plea agreements. These appeals would therefore be governed by rule 9.140(b)(2)(B)(iii), under which a direct appeal of the involuntariness of a plea is permitted only if preserved by a motion to withdraw.
A criminal defendant may contest the voluntariness of a plea after sentencing by filing a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. This rule, however, does not apply to juvenile proceedings. See A.F. v. State, 718 So. 2d 260, 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); cf. T.G. v. State, 717 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (explaining that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.800 does not apply in juvenile proceedings). But a writ of habeas corpus is available to a juvenile. See In Interest of W.B., 428 So. 2d 309, 312 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).
We agree with the W.B. court’s determination that the proper avenue for a juvenile to challenge the voluntariness of his plea is by petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court.
Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to J.M.B.’s filing such a petition, if he desires.
Affirmed.
ALTENBERND, A.C.J., and BLUE, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. T.G., 800 So. 2d 204 (Fla. 2001)…QUINCE, J. We have for review T.G. v. State, 741 So. 2d 517 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999), which expressly and directly conflicts with the decisions in J.M.B. v. State, 750 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), J.S. v. State, 658 So. 2d 638 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), and J.L. v. State, 650 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla. Const. For the reasons expressed below, we approve the Fifth District’s decisio…1 / 2
-
D.C.W. v. State, 775 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)…the five year legal maximum for the charged offense. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings in accordance with this opinion. BLUE, A.C.J., and FULMER J., Concur. . We note that the Fourth District cited to our decision in J.M.B. v. State, 750 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999), to support its holding that there must be a motion to withdraw a plea in order to preserve the issue for appeal. See J.A. v. State, 758 So. 2d 1276 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000). However, J.M.B. is not applicable because that case question…
-
D.E.R. v. State, 993 So. 2d 1030 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…the voluntariness of his plea based on alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. See State v. T.G., 800 So. 2d 204, 213 (Fla.2001) (recognizing that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 does not apply to juvenile proceedings); J.M.B. v. State, 750 So. 2d 654, 655 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999) (stating that when a juvenile does not file a motion to withdraw his plea, “the proper avenue for a juvenile to challenge the voluntariness of his plea is by petition for writ of habeas corpus in the circuit court”). Affirm…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- A. F. v. State, 718 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- William Earl Banks v. Singletary, 718 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
- In the Interest of W.B., 428 So. 2d 309 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983)
- Cooper v. State, 717 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)