DANIEL S. BARNES, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Involuntary Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges the summary denial of his Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. In his motion the appellant alleged that he was on medication when he entered his plea, and that this medication and his mental illness made him unable to understand the consequences of the plea, so as to render it involuntary. The appellant also alleged that counsel was aware of but did not inform the court of these circumstances. In denying the rule 3.850 motion the trial court referred to the written plea agreement and the plea colloquy, determining that these materials refuted the appellant’s claim.
However, the plea agreement does not suffice in this regard in itself, and there was no inquiry or discussion during the plea colloquy as to medication or mental illness. The appellant’s claim is facially sufficient, and is not refuted by these attachments to the order de nying relief. See Libertelli v. State, 750 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000); Payne v. State, 747 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000); Rivera v. State, 746 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). The summary denial of the Rule 3.850 motion is therefore reversed, and the case is remanded.
ALLEN, C.J., BOOTH and BENTON, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Russ v. State, 937 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…because the appellant categorically denied being under the influence of medication at his plea hearing, we affirm the trial court’s summary denial of this claim. LEWIS and THOMAS, JJ„ concur. . We are not unmindful of the case of Barnes v. State, 801 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); we, however, find that case is not controlling because there is no indication what was actually contained in the appellant's written plea agreement or whether, during the plea colloquy, the appellant acknowledged that he read an…
-
Cook v. State, 865 So. 2d 628 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…owever, the plea colloquy does not reflect that the trial court ever inquired into whether the appellant was under the influence of any drugs or medication. Thus, the trial court erred in summarily denying the appellant’s claim. See Barnes v. State, 801 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Libertelli v. State, 750 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Accordingly, we reverse the trial court’s order with respect to the appellant’s first claim, affirm the trial court’s order with respect to the remainder of the appellant…
-
Devers v. State, 186 So. 3d 1126 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…cognizable in a 3.850 motion. Mikenas v. State, 460 So. 2d 359 (Fla.1984). As a result, the trial court was required to attach evidence conclusively refuting such a claim. See, e.g., Barnes v. State, 124 So. 3d 904, 915 (Fla.2013); Barnes v. State, 801 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (reversing summary denial of 3.850 motion where defendant alleged plea was involuntary due to mental'illness and court failed to attach documents that' conclusively refuted his " claims); Young v. State, 789 So. 2d 1160, 1162 (Fl…
Authorities Cited
- Rivera v. State, 746 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)
- Harris v. State, 747 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Libertelli v. State, 750 So. 2d 138 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)