STEVEN W. DEFONTES, 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.
Steven Defontes appealed the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief challenging the voluntariness of his guilty pleas to robbery and violation of probation. Defontes claimed he was misinformed about the maximum sentences he faced and would not have pleaded guilty had he known the true maximum terms. The appellate court reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing.
The court reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on the first three interrelated claims of involuntary plea based on ineffective assistance of counsel, and remanded for the trial court to address the fourth claim that it had not expressly considered.
[1] A guilty plea may be deemed involuntary if the defendant was not fully informed of the maximum potential sentences for the charges.
[2] A defendant's claim that their guilty plea was involuntary due to misinformation about sentencing maximums warrants an evidentiary hearing.
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“Defontes made four interrelated claims of involuntary pleas in his motion. The trial court order denied the first three but did not address the fourth claim.”
Establishes that the trial court incompletely addressed all of Defontes' claims, requiring remand
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefontes pleaded guilty to robbery and violation of probation. He claimed that at his plea hearing, he was advised he faced sentences of fifteen years…
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 Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Steven Defontes appeals the trial court order summarily denying his motion for post-conviction relief in which he claimed that his guilty pleas to robbery and violation of probation from an earlier case were involuntary. Defontes made four interrelated claims of involuntary pleas in his motion.
The trial court order denied the first three but did not address the fourth claim. The interrelated claims were that De-fontes was not told by the court or counsel, and the prosecutor withheld the information, that he faced a maximum sentence of fifteen years in prison for the robbery and seven years for the violation of probation, based on an agreement in the latter case. Instead, Defontes alleged that he was advised at his plea hearing that he faced sentences of fifteen years on each case, which could run consecutively. He alleged that he learned of the seven year maximum on the violation of probation case only at sentencing, and that he would not have entered his pleas had he known the true maximum terms he faced.
The State has conceded the need for an evidentiary hearing on the first three, interrelated claims in the context of a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel resulting in involuntary plea. See Mourra v. State, 884 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004); Barnhill v. State, 828 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). The State also concedes the need to remand for the trial court to consider appellant’s fourth claim which the trial court did not expressly address. We agree with this disposition and therefore reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing on claims one through three as an ineffective assistance of counsel claim resulting in involuntary plea, and for the trial court to address claim four. Reversed and Remanded.
GUNTHER, FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bennie Frank Smith v. State, 884 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Kasim McDONALD v. State, 884 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Barnhill v. State, 828 So. 2d 405 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)