MICHAEL EARNEST CANNON, 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.
Michael Earnest Cannon appeals a denial of relief, arguing that an involuntary confession was introduced at his robbery trial. The court reversed the trial court's denial of a hearing, holding that because Cannon was deprived of his direct appeal through administrative error in the Public Defender's office, he is entitled to raise confession-related issues through collateral attack.
Although confession issues ordinarily can only be raised on direct appeal, Cannon is entitled to raise such questions through collateral attack because he was deprived of his right to a direct appeal through administrative error not attributable to him, and equal protection principles prohibit the state from discriminating against indigent appellants.
“It has been consistently held that questions concerning an alleged involuntary or inadmissible confession can only be raised upon direct appeal from the judgment and sentence and cannot be raised by collateral attack.”
Establishes the general rule that confession issues cannot ordinarily be raised collaterally
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCannon was charged with robbery in December 1961 and initially pleaded guilty without counsel. His conviction was set aside and he was granted a new t…
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 Indigent Appeals cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendant, Michael Earnest Cannon, appeals a denial of relief under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix.
The defendant was charged with robbery in December 1961 and without the aid of counsel pleaded guilty. The judgment and sentence were set aside and he was granted a new trial and counsel was appointed to represent him. On August 30, 1963, after he had again been arraigned, pleaded not guilty and tried before a jury, he was found guilty as charged. On November 15-, 1963, some 76 days after his trial, the defendant filed a motion for appointment of counsel for appeal and on the same day the Assistant Public Defender of the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit was appointed to represent him on appeal.
The notice of appeal was filed by the court-appointed Public Defender on March 30, 1964. The record discloses that the more than four months delay in filing said notice of appeal was due to confusion in the office of the Public Defender of the then Fifteenth Judicial Circuit of Florida. On motion of the State the appeal was dismissed as not having been timety filed. Cannon v. State, Fla.App.1964, 169 So.2d 533.
On February 15, 1965, the appellant filed a motion to vacate and set aside the judgment and conviction of August 30, 1963. The allegations of said motion charged that the statement in the nature of a confession obtained from him during the investigation of the crime, which was introduced in evidence, was not freely and voluntarily given. The trial court denied the motion without hearing on the ground that such matters can be raised only upon a direct appeal from the judgment and sentence.
It has been consistently held that questions concerning an alleged involuntary or inadmissible confession can only be raised upon direct appeal from the judgment and sentence and cannot be raised by collateral attack. Rollins v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 377.
The record in this case, hewev'er, conclusively establishes the fact that the defendant has not waived and has been deprived of a federal constitutional right through no fault of his own. Although there is no federal constitutional right to appeal, Florida has established the right to appeal criminal convictions and the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth amendment requires that the State not discriminate against appeals by indigents. Lane v. Brown, 1963, 372 U.S. 477, 83 S.Ct. 768, 9 L.Ed.2d 892; Griffin v. People of State of Illinois, 1956, 351 U.S. 12, 76 S.Ct. 585, 100 L.Ed. 891. Under such circumstances the defendant is entitled to raise such questions as could have been raised on direct appeal in a collateral attack upon the judgment of conviction. Jackson v. State, Fla.App.1964, 166 So.2d 194.
Accordingly, the order appealed is reversed with directions that the court grant a hearing to the defendant in accordance with this opinion.
SMITH, C. J, ANDREWS, J., and SHANNON, GEORGE T., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Platt v. Louie L. Wainwright, 208 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)…itioner must be afforded a new trial unless the State can and will allow Petitioner an opportunity fully to raise on collateral attack all issues open to him on direct appeal. See Wainwright v. Simpson, 360 F. 2d 307 (5 Cir., 1966); Cannon v. State, 181 So. 2d 584 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1966). “It is, therefore, upon consideration, “ORDERED: “Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus by Orville Platt is granted. Respondent may retain Petitioner in custody for a reasonable time while the State determines whether to allo…
-
Levigne Jernigan v. State, 214 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…trial court erred in denying appellant an evidentiary hearing on his motion. State v. Weeks, Fla.1964, 166 So. 2d 892; Miller v. State, Fla.App.1967, 193 So. 2d 647; Murray v. State, [*67] Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 292; Cannon v. State, Fla.App.1966, 181 So. 2d 584; Hinton v. State, Fla.App.1965, 177 So. 2d 522; Brooks v. State, Fla.App.1965, 176 So. 2d 116; Henderson v. State, Fla.App.1965, 174 So. 2d 73; Jackson v. State, Fla.App.1964, 166 So. 2d 194. I would reverse and remand for an evi-dentiary hearing.…
-
Louie L. Wainwright v. Simpson, 360 F.2d 307 (5th Cir. 1966)…92; Young v. State, Fla.1965, 177 So. 2d 345, 347; Sims v. Balkcom, 1964, 220 Ga. 7, 136 S.E. 2d 766, 771. . See State ex rel. Ervin v. Smith, Fla. 1964, 160 So. 2d 518; Jackson v. State, Fla.App.1964, 166 So. 2d 194; Cannon v. State, Fla.App.1966, 181 So. 2d 584.…
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
- Griffin v. Illinois, 351 U.S. 12 (U.S. 1956)
- Lane v. Brown, 372 U.S. 477 (U.S. 1963)
- Jackson v. State, 166 So. 2d 194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Bell v. State, 179 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Craft v. State, 169 So. 2d 533 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Lester L. & Larue D. Evans t/a Josef & Charles Hair Stylists v. The Fla. Indus. Comm'n, 169 So. 2d 533 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)