WILLIE PERRY JACKSON, 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.
Willie Perry Jackson appealed the denial of his motion to vacate a first-degree murder conviction and life sentence. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, holding that Jackson's guilty plea was voluntary and knowing, made after consultation with counsel, and that he must accept the consequences of that plea.
The court affirmed the denial of the motion to vacate, holding that Jackson's guilty plea was voluntary and done with the full consultation and concurrence of Jackson after questioning by the trial judge. Jackson must accept the consequences of his voluntary action in pleading guilty.
“We have read the entire testimony that was adduced against the defendant and find that the action of pleading guilty was done by his counsel and that the defendant concurred in it as he was questioned by the able trial judge and the defendant admitted this was willingly done by him.”
Establishes that the court reviewed the record to confirm the plea was voluntary and knowing, made with counsel's assistance and the defendant's explicit concurrence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJackson was indicted for first-degree murder on September 28, 1965, in Highlands County. He was appointed counsel and pleaded not guilty by reason of …
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 Life Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant has filed this appeal from a final order of the trial court denying his amended Motion to Vacate Judgment and Sentence under Florida Criminal Rules of Procedure 1.850, formerly Rule 1, 33 F.S.A.
The appellant, defendant below, was indicted by the grand jury of Highlands County on September 28, 1965, for murder in the first degree.
On August 30, 1965, two attorneys were appointed by the court to represent the defendant and on November 5, 1965, he was arraigned and plead not guilty by reason of insanity. On November 8, 1965, the court ordered psychiatric examination of the defendant and the reports showed he was sane at the time of the commission of the purportéd crime, and that he could assist his counsel in the defense of the charges lodged against him.
On January 28, 1966, the defendant was tried and after the State rested its case the defendant moved for a directed verdict on the ground that the State had failed to prove that the death of the decedent was caused by the bullet wounds inflicted by the defendant, which motion was denied by the court.
Counsel for the defendant asked permission of the court to withdraw his plea of not guilty and to enter his plea of guilty with request for mercy.
Counsel representing the State said:
“Your Honor, in view of that request, of entering a plea of guilty, the State will not object to the Court accepting that plea, and on the basis that he get a life sentence.
“THE COURT: Bring the prisoner to the bar. — You have consulted with your counsel on this action?
“WILLIE PERRY JACKSON: Yes sir.
“THE COURT: And this is your decision ?
“WILLIE PERRY JACKSON: Yes sir.
“THE COURT: All right, the Court accepts your plea of guilty and adjudicates you to stand guilty of the crime of murder in the first degree as charged in the indictment in this case. Do you have any cause to say why sentence should not be imposed upon you ?
“WILLIE PERRY JACKSON: [Shaking head]
“THE COURT: The taking of a human life, even under the responsibility and the cold logic and adversary proceeding of a trial under the sanction and duty of law is an awesome responsibility, but to take it as you did under this evidence involving a dispute of money, however right your position as to that money be, is wholly defenseless. It’s *786the judgment and sentence of this Court that you be confined by the Department of Corrections of the State of Florida for the term of your natural life.”
We have read the entire testimony that was adduced against the defendant and find that the action of pleading guilty was done by his counsel and that the defendant concurred in it as he was questioned by the able trial judge and the defendant admitted this was willingly done by him.
The testimony in this case would have been sufficient to have sent the defendant to the electric chair had the jury so determined. The defendant pleaded guilty in order to receive a life sentence instead of a possible death sentence. He must now accept the consequences of his voluntary action in pleading guilty.
We conclude that the lower court’s order denying appellant’s amended motion to vacate judgment and sentence was correct and should be affirmed.
Affirmed.
LILES, C. J., and PIERCE, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dixon v. State, 252 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…one-half years after his plea in a case in which he was facing a capital sentence. In this connection, attention is called to Pait v. State, Fla.App.1966, 188 So. 2d 15; Plymale v. State, Fla.App.1967, 201 So. 2d 85; Jackson v. State, Fla.App.1968, 215 So. 2d 784; Goodall v. State, Fla.App.1970, 232 So. 2d 263; Ersek v. State, Fla.App.1970, 238 So. 2d 481; O’Fallon v. State, Fla.App., 239 So. 2d 872; North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162. [*596] Wherefore, for the above reasons,…
-
Istvan J. Ersek v. State, 238 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…voluntariness of his plea; and this record demonstrates no reason to interfere with the trial judge’s order here under review. Plymale v. State, Fla.App.1967, 201 So. 2d 85; Lee v. State, Fla.App.1967, 204 So. 2d 245; Jackson v. State, Fla.App.1968, 215 So. 2d 784; Brumley v. State, Fla.App.1969, 224 So. 2d 447; Garcia v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So. 2d 300; Steinhauser v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So. 2d 446; Halliday v. United States, 394 U.S. 831, 89 S.Ct. 1498, 23 L.Ed.2d 16; Bishop v. Sharkey, Dist.Ct. Di…