STATE OF FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
FREDERICK C. WILSON, RESPONDENT
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.
Florida Supreme Court quashed the Fourth District's decision invalidating the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act and remanded for proceedings consistent with State v. Cotton, while granting the defendant the right to withdraw his guilty plea because he was misinformed about sentencing consequences.
The Prison Releasee Reoffender Act does not violate separation of powers or other constitutional provisions, and a defendant who entered a guilty plea after being misinformed about sentencing under the Act may withdraw that plea.
[1] A defendant who enters a guilty plea after being misinformed by the trial court regarding potential sentencing consequences under a statute has the right to withdraw that…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“upon remand to the trial court, respondent shall have the right to withdraw his guilty plea”
The Court's holding regarding the defendant's remedy due to being misinformed about sentencing consequences at the time of his guilty plea.
Frederick Wilson entered a guilty plea after being advised by the trial court that he might not be sentenced pursuant to the Prison Releasee Reoffende…
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 Constitutional Challenge To Statute cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We have for review the decision in State v. Wilson, 741 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999), which the district court certified to be in conflict with the opinions in Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), and McKnight v. State, 727 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We recently approved the First District’s decision in Woods, holding that the Prison Releasee Reoffender Act, as properly interpreted by the First District, does not violate separation of powers, and rejecting other constitutional challenges to the Act. See State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 & SC95281, - So. 2d -, 2000 WL 766521 (Fla. June 15, 2000). Accordingly, for the reasons expressed in Cotton, we quash the Fourth District’s decision in this case, and remand for further proceedings consistent with our opinion in Cotton. Because it appears that the respondent entered a plea of guilty after having been advised by the court that respondent, upon such plea, might not be sentenced pursuant to the Act, upon remand to the trial court, respondent shall have the right to withdraw his guilty plea.
It is so ordered.
HARDING, C.J., and SHAW, WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE and LEWIS, JJ., concur. QUINCE, J., dissents with an opinion.
[*523] QUINCE, J.,
dissenting.
I dissent for the reasons stated in my dissent in State v. Cotton, Nos. SC94996 & SC95281, — So. 2d -, 2000 WL 766521 (Fla. June 15, 2000).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Woods v. State, 740 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- McKNIGHT v. State, 727 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- State v. Wilson, 741 So. 2d 546 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)