FRANK HAMILTON, 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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of a motion to vacate a guilty plea, distinguishing the case from precedent where coercion occurred after a not guilty plea.
No, the trial court did not err. The appellant's allegations of coercion are negated by his subsequent plea of guilty after counsel was appointed.
“The trial judge without a hearing denied appellant's petition to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentences heretofore imposed.”
Describes the procedural posture of the case at the trial court level.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant alleged he was coerced into pleading guilty and sought to vacate his judgment and sentences. The trial judge denied his petition without…
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 Coerced Guilty Plea cases and more on FLexlaw
The trial judge without a hearing denied appellant’s petition to vacate and set aside the judgment and sentences heretofore imposed. Appellant’s motion alleges that he was coerced into pleading guilty and therefore entitled to a hearing under Criminal Procedure Rule #1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix. Appellant contends that the decision of this Court in Jones v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 165 So.2d 191, requires a reversal of this case. We do not agree, in that the Jones case, supra, and the case sub judice are distinguishable and therefore we affirm the order of the trial court.
In the Jones case, relied upon by appellant, the alleged coercion occurred subsequent to the defendant’s arraignment and plea of not guilty and while he was in the county jail awaiting trial. In the case at Bar the alleged coercion occurred prior to appellant’s plea of not guilty and subsequent appointment of counsel after which time appellant changed his plea to guilty. Appellant’s allegations of coercion are negated by his subsequent plea of not guilty.
Affirmed.
SHANNON, Acting C. J., and HOB-SON and PIERCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Coy Lee Doty v. State, 201 So. 2d 762 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)…PER CURIAM. Upon consideration of the briefs and record filed herein and the' court finding that appellant has failed to demonstrate prejudicial error the judgment appealed is affirmed. See Hamilton v. State of Florida (Fla.App.2d 1966), 186 So. 2d 316. WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur.…
-
Nolan v. State, 192 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)…y do raise a factual issue of coercion which can be resolved only by a hearing. Reversed. SMITH, C. J., and ANDREWS and WALDEN, JJ., concur. . Compare with the above: Farrington v. State, Fla.1966, 183 So. 2d 681; Hamilton v. State, Fla.App.1966, 186 So. 2d 316. See also Williams v. State, Fla.App.1965, 174 So. 2d 97.…
-
Bennett v. State, 203 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)…175 So. 2d 95; Jones v. State, Fla.App.1964, 165 So. 2d 191, 192, notwithstanding the fact that he was represented by private counsel at the time he entered his plea. Williams v. State, supra, 186 So. 2d at 280; cf. Hamilton v. State, Fla.App.1966, 186 So. 2d 316, 317. Accordingly, the order denying appellant’s motion is reversed and the cause remanded for a hearing on his claim of coercion. Reversed and remanded. ALLEN, Acting C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Jones v. State, 165 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)