ELMER MOORE, 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.
The court held that a defendant's claim of an involuntary guilty plea based on counsel's misinformation about the admissibility of victim character evidence is facially sufficient for a rule 3.850 motion.
Appellant filed a motion alleging his guilty plea was involuntary because his counsel misinformed him that the victim's prior criminal history and rep…
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 Erroneous Advice Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The appellant challenges the trial court’s order summarily denying his motion alleging an involuntary plea filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Because the appellant has stated a facially sufficient claim, we reverse.
In the instant rule 3.850 motion, the appellant alleged that his guilty plea was involuntary because counsel misinformed him that the victim’s prior criminal history and reputation of violence were inadmissible evidence. Evidence of a deceased victim’s violent character is admissible when self-defense is asserted if there is an issue as to either the conduct of the deceased or the reasonableness of the defendant’s belief as to imminent danger from the deceased. See § 90.404(l)(b), Fla. Stat. (2007); Banks v. State, 351 So. 2d 1071, 1072 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977). A claim that a defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere based on the erroneous advice of counsel is generally cognizable in a post-conviction motion under rule 3.850. See Bond v. State, 695 So. 2d 778, 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). A general acknowledgment during a plea colloquy that the defendant received no promises for the entry of a plea does not conclusively refute a sworn allegation that the defendant was prompted to enter the plea by the incorrect advice of his own lawyer. See id.
The appellant satisfied the specific pleading requirement and his motion is facially sufficient. Furthermore, the trial court did not refute his allegations with adequate record attachments.
We, therefore, reverse the summary denial of the appellant’s claim alleging that his plea was involuntary and remand for the trial court either to attach record por tions conclusively refuting the appellant’s claim or hold an evidentiary hearing.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
BROWNING, C.J., WOLF, and WEBSTER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Savage v. State, 99 So. 3d 1001 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…fic acts of violence by the victim is admissible to reveal the reasonableness of the defendant’s apprehension at the time of the incident” when self-defense is raised. Smith v. State, 606 So. 2d 641, 643 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). See also Moore v. State, 991 So. 2d 977, 978 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008) (“Evidence of a ... victim’s violent character is admissible when self-defense is asserted if there is an issue as to either the conduct of the deceased or the reasonableness of the defendant’s belief as to imminent danger f…
-
Dobarganes v. State, 239 So. 3d 1265 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…additional affiant. See, e.g., State v. Leroux, 689 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1996); Garcia v.State, 907 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005); Fisher v. State, 824 So. 2d 1050 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002); Rensoli v. State, 718 So. 2d 1278 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Moore v. State, 991 So. 2d 977, 978 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008); Jones v. State, 846 So. 2d 1224 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). We express no opinion regarding the merits of Dobarganes's claims or entitlement to relief. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.…
Authorities Cited
- Willie Banks v. State, 351 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Bond v. State, 695 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)