CARL BEAUFORD CARVER, 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.
Defendant Carver appeals the denial of post-conviction relief after pleading guilty to second-degree murder without counsel. The court reversed and remanded, finding a critical constitutional deficiency where the defendant was not shown to have knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, and prejudice is presumed on guilty pleas entered without counsel.
The plea was invalid because the record does not show that the indigent defendant was offered appointed counsel or that any inquiry was made into whether he knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel. Prejudice from entering a guilty plea without counsel is presumed in such circumstances.
“The record does not disclose that the indigent defendant was offered court appointed counsel on the second degree murder charge nor does it reflect what was done to determine the question of waiver vel non — whether the right to counsel was knowingly and intelligently waived. This was a critical deficiency.”
Establishes the constitutional error: the trial court failed to ensure a valid waiver of counsel or offer appointed counsel
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarver was indicted on first-degree murder. From arrest until arraignment, he had no counsel. At arraignment, he was advised of his right to counsel o…
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 Petition For Post Conviction Relief cases and more on FLexlaw
Carl Beauford Carver appeals an order denying his petition for post conviction relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix.
It appears that the petitioner was indicted on a charge of first degree murder. From the time of his arrest to the time of his arraignment he was not represented by counsel. On arraignment he was advised that he had a right to be represented by counsel on the capital charge. The state attorney agreed that he be allowed to plead guilty to second degree murder, which plea was entered without advice of counsel. The defendant apparently was not informed that he had the right to be represented by counsel on the lesser charge. He was adjudged guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment.
The petitioner asserts that he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel. The record does not disclose that the indigent defendant was offered court appointed counsel on the second degree murder charge nor does it reflect what was done to determine the question of waiver vel non — whether the right to counsel was knowingly and intelligently waived. This was a critical deficiency. Johnson v. Zerbst, 1938, 304 U.S. 458, 58 S.Ct. 1019, 82 L.Ed. 1461; Phillips v. State, Fla.App.1964, 164 So.2d 858; Devanney v. State, Fla.App.1964, 165 So.2d 265. In these circumstances prejudice is presumed to have resulted on the plea of guilty without benefit of counsel. Dortch v. State, Fla.App.1964, 165 So.2d 409, 411; Sams v. State, Fla.App.1964, 163 So.2d 10; King v. State, Fla.App.1963, 157 So.2d 440.
The petitioner here, as defendant, was faced with accepting appointed counsel and being tried for first degree murder, a capital offense, or alternatively pleading guilty to second degree murder with assurance that at worst his life would be spared. Thus no “informed” plea was entered. A layman is not expected to know the lesser offenses that are included in'a technically worded indictment; and the record does not disclose that the defendant was advised that, in addition to second degree murder, *899there are other homicides that are lesser offenses within a first degree murder indictment.
The order accordingly is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
ALLEN, Acting C. J., and WHITE and ANDREWS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mason v. State, 176 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 1965)…4; Sams v. [*80] State, Fla.App., 163 So. 2d 10; Stewart v. State, Fla.App. 163 So. 2d 527; Phillips v. State, Fla.App. 164 So. 2d 858; Holmes v. State, Fla.App., 165 So. 2d 433; Archer v. State, Fla.App., 166 So. 2d 163; Carver v. State, Fla.App., 171 So. 2d 898. See also the opinion of the Third District Court of Appeal in Furman v. State, 162 So. 2d 308. We approve the views on the subject announced by the Courts of Appeal of the Second and Third Districts in the cited cases. In the instant case, therefo…
-
Robles v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)…ding charges without first appointing counsel or securing an informed waiver of his right to counsel."). Fundamental errors, by their very nature, prejudice the defendant. Reed v. State, 837 So. 2d 366, 370 (Fla. 2002); see, e.g., Carver v. State, 171 So. 2d 898, 898 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965) (holding that prejudice was "presumed to have resulted on the plea of guilty without benefit of counsel" where the record did not show that the petitioner waived his right to counsel). Additionally, an uncounseled plea, enter…
Authorities Cited
- Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (U.S. 1938)
- King v. State, 157 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Phillips v. State, 164 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Dortch v. State, 165 So. 2d 409 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Sams v. State, 163 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Devanney v. State, 165 So. 2d 265 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)