JAMES COHEN, 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 a guilty plea and sentence for assault with intent to commit murder, finding the appellant was adequately represented by counsel and that other claims should be raised in the trial court.
Yes, the appellant was adequately represented by counsel, as he affirmed his satisfaction with the public defender's representation at the time of his plea.
“The record conclusively shows that at the time the appellant changed his pleas from not guilty to guilty he was questioned by the court as to whether or not he was satisfied with the representation given him by the public defenderos office, to which he replied in the affirmative.”
Establishes the factual basis for the court's finding regarding counsel.
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 pleaded guilty to two charges of assault with intent to commit first-degree murder and was sentenced to concurrent twenty-year terms. He…
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 Right To Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant pled guilty to two informations, each .charging him with assault with intent to commit first degree murder. He was adjudged guilty and sentenced to twenty years at hard labor under each information, such sentences to run concurrently.
In this appeal the appellant claims that he was not given adequate opportunity to obtain private counsel.
The record conclusively shows that at the time the appellant changed his pleas from not guilty to guilty he was questioned by the court as to whether or not he was satisfied with the representation given him by the public defenderos office, to which he replied in the affirmative.
Appellant’s other point on appeal should properly be raised by a motion under Criminal Rule 1.850, 33 F.S.A. The affirmance of the judgments and sentences by this appeal shall in no way prejudice the appellant as to any motions he might see fit to file in the trial court under Criminal Rule 1.850.
Affirmed.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and PIERCE and MANN, TT., concur.