DAVID FAIRES, 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 the language in the plea form did not conclusively refute the defendant's claim that his attorney misrepresented the potential sentence length.
Faires pleaded no contest to multiple charges and was sentenced. He later filed for post-conviction relief, alleging his attorney assured him of a sho…
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 Conclusively Refute cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
After entering a no contest plea to ten counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition and one count of stalking, Faires was sentenced to ten years in prison followed by forty-five years sex offender probation. He subsequently filed a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief, alleging that he would not have entered the plea but for his counsel’s assurance that he would not receive more than four years in prison. The trial court summarily denied Faires’ motion. No transcript of the plea colloquy was attached to the trial court’s order. We reverse.
The written plea form executed by Faires did not set forth any agreement regarding the sentence to be imposed. It did include a provision advising Faires of the maximum sentence for each charge against him. In summarily denying Faires’ motion, the trial court relied upon the following language found in the plea form:
I have not been promised any reward nor has it been suggested that I will be rewarded in any manner, or that I will be given any leniency, other than the terms set forth in this document, in return for my entering this plea. No person has used any threats, force, pressure or intimidation to .induce me to make this plea. No promises concerning gain time or potential release dates have been made to me.
This language does not conclusively refute Faires’ claim. State v. Leroux, 689 So. 2d 235 (Fla.1996) (general acknowledgment that defendant not promised anything to plead guilty fails to conclusively refute sworn allegation that defendant prompted to enter plea by attorney’s misrepresentation regarding length of sentence); see also Johnson v. State, 757 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). On remand, the trial court shall attach additional records conclusively refuting Faires’ claim or, in the alternative, conduct an evidentiary hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
MONACO, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wisner Delice v. State, 103 So. 3d 262 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012)…general ac-knowledgement that defendant was not promised anything to plead guilty fails to conclusively refute sworn allegation that defendant was prompted to enter plea by attorney’s misrepresentation regarding length of sentence); Faires v. State, 995 So. 2d 1074, 1074 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (written plea form insufficient to conclusively refute claim that defendant prompted to enter plea by attorney’s misrepresentation regarding length of sentence; no transcript of plea colloquy attached to trial court’s order…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Leroux, 689 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1996)
- Johnson v. State, 757 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)