CHARLIE PAUL, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 trial court did not err in denying the petition to vacate judgment and sentence because the petitioner failed to prove his guilty pleas were unlawfully induced.
Appellant was convicted on five counts of forgery based on guilty pleas. He petitioned to vacate the judgment, alleging his pleas were unlawfully indu…
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 Collateral Attack On Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal of a denial of a petition to vacate judgment and sentence.
Appellant was convicted on five counts of forgery. He was sentenced on each count, sentences to run concurrently. It is petitioner’s contention that his convictions were predicated upoh guilty pleas, which pleas were unlawfully induced.
The trial court conducted a full and evi-dentiary hearing at which petitioner was present and represented by counsel.- After taking testimony and hearing the arguments of counsel the trial court resentenced the petitioner due to some confusion in the record with regard to prior sentences, but otherwise denied the petitioner relief. We find no error and affirm.
A judgment of conviction is presumed valid1 and, upon a hearing on a motion to vacate, it is incumbent upon one collaterally attacking such judgment to prove his allegations.2 In the instant case, the trial judge found:
“That there is no evidence to support petitioner’s allegations that his former *538pleas of guilty, * * * were coerced or obtained as a result of promises allegedly made by the state or by the public defender;”
The record supports the trial judge’s findings and this case will stand affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Allen v. State, 463 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…heir existence and presumptive validity is sufficient to support the felony petit theft charge under section 812.014(2)(c). It is, of course, well established that a duly entered judgment of conviction and sentence is presumed valid. Paul v. State, 177 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965). The United States Supreme Court has held, however, that a conviction obtained in violation of the defendant’s constitutional right to counsel is void and cannot be used by the state in a subsequent criminal proceeding to support…
-
State v. Pitts, 241 So. 2d 399 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)…602. (Fla.1970). . Chambers v. State, 117 Fla. 642, 158 So. 153 (1934) ; and Russ v. State, 95 So. 2d 594 (Fla.1957). . Coleman v. State, 193 So. 2d 699 (Fla.App.1st 1967) ; and Harris v. State, 177 So. 2d 543 (Fla.App.3d 1965). . Paul v. State, 177 So. 2d 537 (Fla.App. 3d 1965). . McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 90 S.Ct. 1441, 25 L.Ed.2d 763 (1970), and Parker v. North Carolina, 397 U.S. 790, 90 S.Ct. 1458, 25 L.Ed.2d 785 (1970). . Gillyard v. State, 175 So. 2d 798 (Fla.App.3d 1965). . Brady v. Ma…
-
Jackson v. State, 179 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Wilder v. State, 156 So. 2d 395 (Fla.App.1963), Kirkland v. State, 165 So. 2d 774 (Fla.App.1964), Thomas v. State, 172 So. 2d 245 (Fla.App.1965), and Paul v. State, 177 So. 2d 537 (Fla.App.1965). RAWLS, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and JOHNSON, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458 (U.S. 1938)
- Russ v. State, 95 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 1957)
- Twining v. United States, 321 F.2d 432 (5th Cir. 1963)
- Harris v. State, 177 So. 2d 543 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)