ROGER WAYNE CARTER, 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 appellate court affirmed the denial of a motion for post-conviction relief, holding that the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Escobedo v. Illinois, which established a right to counsel during interrogation, does not apply retroactively in Florida.
No, the proposition announced in Escobedo v. Illinois does not have retroactive effect in the State of Florida.
“[QUOTE REDACTED — failed verbatim audit (paraphrase, not verbatim). See original_text for the text as originally displayed.]”
Establishes the core legal principle for the decision.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. He filed a second motion for post-conviction relief, argui…
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.
The appellant- plead guilty to an indictment for first degree murder, and on March 17, 1958, the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment. His first motion for relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule I, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix was denied on October 29, 1964.
On October 7, 1964, the appellant filed a second motion for relief, pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule I. The lower court conducted a full evidentiary hearing on defendant’s second Rule I motion. At the conclusion of the hearing the motion was denied and this appeal followed. The sole basis of this appeal is appellant’s contention that his confession and subsequent guilty plea were illegally obtained because the confession was procured in violation of his right to counsel at interrogation. Appellant relies upon Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964). The proposition announced in Escobedo does not have retroactive effect in the State of Florida'. Bell v. State, Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d 80; Lawrence v. State, *884Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 467 [opinion filed February 8, 1966]. See also Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1964, 169 So.2d 861; Lee v. State, Fla.App.1965, 173 So.2d 520.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Escobedo v. Illinois, 378 U.S. 478 (U.S. 1964)
- Bridges v. State, 169 So. 2d 861 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- LEE v. State, 173 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)
- Bell v. State, 175 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Lawrence v. State, 182 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)