CARLOS CAMACHO, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1967-10-18
No. 7071
ALLEN, Acting C. J., and PIERCE, J., concur.
203 So. 2d 23 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1967)

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.


Holding

A guilty plea induced by an illegally extracted confession is not grounds for postconviction relief if other sufficient evidence existed to prompt the plea.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant pleaded guilty to second-degree murder after being indicted for first-degree murder. He filed a motion for postconviction relief, alleging h…

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.


Opinion of the Court
SHANNON, Judge.

*24SHANNON, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying without a hearing a motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. I, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix.

Appellant Carlos Camacho was indicted for first-degree murder. After originally pleading not guilty, he subsequently substituted a plea of guilty to second-degree murder and was sentenced to a life term. At the time of his guilty plea he was represented by counsel. As the ground for his postconviction motion he alleged 'that the police illegally extracted a confession from him and that as a result he had no practical alternative to pleading guilty to second-degree murder.

The record shows that appellant himself indicated that he was pleading guilty to second-degree murder voluntarily, after discussion with his counsel and his relatives, and with full understanding that he might receive a life sentence. The record further indicates that there was evidence available, apart from appellant’s confession, sufficient to establish appellant’s guilt. These factors permit the reasonable inference that such evidence, and not the confession, prompted appellant to plead guilty to second-degree murder rather than face a possible death sentence. Appellant’s contention that his guilty plea was induced solely by his confession is insubstantial and insufficient to require a hearing. Childress v. State, Fla.App.1966, 181 So.2d 655; Thompson v. State, Fla.App.1965, 176 So.2d 564, 568; Williams v. State, Fla.App., 174 So.2d 97, 100, appeal dismissed mem., Fla., 179 So.2d 211, cert. denied mem., 1965, 382 U.S. 963, 86 S.Ct. 448, 15 L.Ed.2d 366; Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1964, 169 So. 2d 861, 862.

Accordingly, the order denying appellant’s postconviction motion is affirmed.

Affirmed.

ALLEN, Acting C. J., and PIERCE, J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw