HERBERT THOMPSON, 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 judge did not err in denying the second petition for relief.
Appellant pleaded guilty to first-degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. He subsequently filed a petition for relief under Criminal Pro…
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
By this appeal, we are called upon to review an order denying a second petition for relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule I, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix.
The appellant was originally charged with first degree murder and pleaded not guilty with the assistance of counsel. Thereafter, he changed his plea to guilty and received a life sentence. This occurred in 1958. Subsequently, he filed a petition for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule I, alleging in substance that he was coerced into changing his plea to guilty. We reviewed the action of the trial court in relation to this matter, and affirmed. See: Thompson v. State, Fla.App.1965, 176 So.2d 564. Thereafter, he filed what was called an amended petition, which was treated as a second petition for relief. Following a hearing thereon, the trial *364judge entered the order denying same, which is here under review.
In substance, the identical ground was raised in the second post-judgment proceeding as in the first, to wit: he was coerced into changing his plea. We have examined the record and briefs in support of the respective parties, and find no error in the action of the trial judge in light of the principles announced in: Rankin v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 168 So.2d 324; Hunt v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 858; Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1966, 183 So.2d 865; Whitney v. State, Fla.App. 1966, 184 So.2d 207.
Therefore, the order here under review is (hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Riley v. State, 214 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 2d DCA 1968)…18; Colebrook v. State, Fla.App.1966, 191 So. 2d 309; and Fields v. State, Fla.App.1967, 202 So. 2d 226. Particularly is this true where a prior denial upon substantially the same ground has been affirmed on appeal. Thompson v. State, Fla.App.1966, 187 So. 2d 363. Courts should be spared the harassment of successive motions by the same prisoner containing repetitious grounds. Piehl v. State, Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 723. Also, the current motion was insufficient upon its face. The mere fact that his trial c…
-
Wells v. State, 197 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)…e law to this effect. See Rankin v. State (Fla.App.1964) 168 So. 2d 324; Carpenter v. State (Fla.App.1965) 176 So. 2d 610; Hall v. State (Fla.App.1966) 183 So. 2d 277; Hunt v. State (Fla.App.1966) 183 So. 2d 858, and Thompson v. State (Fla.App.1966) 187 So. 2d 363. The order appealed from is accordingly .affirmed. SHANNON, Acting C. J., and PIERCE and HOBSON, JJ., concur.…
-
Thompson v. State, 192 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 1966)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 187 So. 2d 363.…
Authorities Cited
- Whitney v. State, 184 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Thompson v. State, 176 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Rankin v. State, 168 So. 2d 324 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Otice Moore Taylor v. State, 183 So. 2d 865 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Hunt v. State, 183 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)
- Caster v. State, 183 So. 2d 858 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)