WILSON FRANCOIS
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A trial court does not abuse its discretion in denying a motion to withdraw a plea filed after sentencing when an extensive colloquy was conducted at the plea hearing.
[1] A defendant seeking to withdraw a guilty plea filed after sentencing bears the burden of establishing that manifest injustice has occurred.
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 intelligenceFrancois filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea after sentencing in a Miami-Dade County criminal case. The trial court had conducted an extensive …
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 Burden Of Proof On Defendant cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed May 20, 2026.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 3D25-1526
Lower Tribunal No. F21-6451
Wilson Francois,
Appellant,
vs.
State of Florida,
Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Laura Shearon Cruz, Judge.
Law Offices of Philip R. Horowitz, and Philip R. Horowitz, for appellant. James Uthmeier, Attorney General, and Jason Michael Ross, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before SCALES, C.J., and LOGUE and MILLER, JJ. PER CURIAM.
The standard of review for a lower court's denial of a motion to withdraw a plea is abuse of discretion. See Coley v. State, 350 So. 3d 168, 168 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022). Moreover, “[w]here (as here) [a motion to withdraw a plea] is filed after sentence has been imposed, the defendant bears the burden of establishing that a 'manifest injustice has occurred.” Toomer v. State, 410 So. 3d 709, 712 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025) (quoting Williams v. State, 919 So. 2d 645, 646 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)). Nothing in this record indicates the trial court abused its discretion in denying Appellant's motion to withdraw his plea considering the extensive colloquy conducted by the trial court when it accepted the Appellant's plea.
Affirmed.
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Francois v. State, 427 So. 3d 1150 (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)
Authorities Cited
- Braddy Williams v. State, 919 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Watts v. State (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)
- Francois v. State, 427 So. 3d 1150 (Fla. 3d DCA 2026)