WILBUR M. JOHNSON, 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 court held that a defendant's guilty plea, entered knowingly and voluntarily with counsel's advice and understanding of consequences, is valid and cannot be vacated.
[1] A guilty plea is valid when a defendant is represented by counsel, understands the charge, and is informed of the consequences of the plea.
[2] A defendant's understanding of the maximum sentence and the right to a jury trial are crucial elements in determining the validity of a guilty plea.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant pleaded guilty to breaking and entering with intent to commit robbery. He later filed a motion to vacate the judgment and sentence, alleging…
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 Consequences cases and more on FLexlaw
Wilbur M. Johnson appeals the denial of his Rule 1.850, 33 F.S.A., motion to vacate and set aside judgment and sentence. Appellant plead guilty to the charge of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony, to-wit: robbery. He was represented in the trial court at arraignment and plea by private counsel and the following colloquy took place at the hearing:
“THE COURT: All right, Mr. Mc-Ewen, you represent Wilbur M. Johnson?
MR. McEWEN: Yes, sir. I would like for the parents to stand here since this young man is only seventeen.
THE COURT: All right. And Dale Alan Johnson?
DEFENDANT DALE ALAN JOHNSON : Yes, sir.
THE COURT: And you are ready to proceed, Mr. McEwen?
MR. McEWEN: If the Court please, we wish to request permission to withdraw pleas which have previously been entered of not guilty to these offenses. We would like to have a statement to follow ours made by either Mr. Cazin or Mr. Hanlon, whoever is the responsible man this morning. We wish to enter a plea of guilty in behalf of both Wilbur and Dale to a lesser included offense in Case No. 67524. I am not looking specifically at the charge itself but to such an offense which would have as its ceiling a maximum of fifteen years imprisonment if it should result in imprisonment.
It’s my understanding from the State Attorney, or the Assistant State Attorney, that under those circumstances, he is willing to nol-pros the aggravated assault case which is presently set for this coming Friday.
MR. CAZIN: I have the case number. It’s Case No. 67525. That is correct, your Honor, the State will nol-pros.
MR. McEWEN: And he will also direct the withdrawal of any other warrants that may be outstanding against either of these boys and I do understand that at the outset there was a first degree murder warrant taken out for them that is still at the jail.
THE COURT: All right.
MR. McEWEN: We, of course, would ask that the plea—
*226THE COURT: Has the charge been formally read to the defendants ?
MR. McEWEN: I have read it to them sometime along the line. But, if not, we will let them read it, themselves, right now.
THE COURT: Well, let the State read it to them, Mr. McEwen, so it will be on the record.
MR. McEWEN: All right, sir.
MR. CAZIN: The State of Florida vs. Wilbur M. Johnson and Dale Alan Johnson, Case No. 67524. Direct Information for Breaking and Entering with Intent to Commit a Felony. In the name and by the authority of the State of Florida; Joseph L. Thury, Assistant State Attorney of the 13th Judicial Circuit in and for the County of Hillsborough, charges that Wilbur M. Johnson and Dale Alan Johnson, on the 17th day of December, 1967, in the County of Hillsborough and State of Florida, did unlawfully break and enter a certain dwelling located at Route 1, Box 925, Dover, State and County aforesaid, a further description and more exact location of which is to the State Attorney unknown, the property of Lora Robbins and Joseph Robbins, with intent to commit a felony therein, to-wit, robbery, that is with the intent to rob, steal and take away from the person or custody of Lora Robbins and Joseph Robbins, money, goods, chattels and other things of value, the property of the said Lora Robbins and Joseph Robbins.
Wilbur M. Johnson, how do you plead to that charge?
DEFENDANT WILBUR M. JOHNSON : Guilty.
MR. CAZIN: Dale Alan Johnson, how do you plead to that charge ?
DEFENDANT DALE ALAN JOHNSON : Guilty.
THE COURT: All right, do each of you thoroughly understand the charge?
DEFENDANT WILBUR M. JOHNSON: Yes, sir.
MR. McEWEN: If the Court please, I spent some time speaking to both of them in the presence of their brother and, presence of another brother, explaining to them the consequences of the plea, that there was no promise by anyone that they would not get jail time as a result of this, but I do assure them that there would be no other charges pending once this plea had been entered. And the State Attorney has confirmed that on the record. I trust that the court reporter is making such a note.
THE COURT: Yes, she is making notes of all of it, Mr. McEwen. But, in addition to that, we have to get on record from the defendants, themselves, these certain things in order to keep the record clear. So, let me ask you fellows, do you understand, each of you, that you could receive a maximum sentence of fifteen years in the state prison as a result of pleading guilty, or being found guilty upon the charge ?
DEFENDANT WILBUR M. JOHNSON : Yes, sir.
DEFENDANT DALE ALAN JOHNSON : Yes, sir.
THE COURT: Do you understand that you are entitled to a jury trial and to be represented by counsel at that trial if you so desire?
DEFENDANT WILBUR M. JOHNSON: Yes.
DEFENDANT DALE ALAN JOHNSON: Yes.
THE COURT: Has anybody promised you, either of you, anything or threatened either of you in any manner whatsoever to get you to plead guilty to this charge ?
DEFENDANT WILBUR M. JOHNSON : No, sir.
DEFENDANT DALE ALAN JOHNSON : No, sir.
THE COURT: All right, and the plea is tendered with your approval, Mr. Mc-Ewen?
*227MR. McEWEN: Yes, sir.
THE COURT: All right, the Court will accept the plea of guilty under those conditions.”
It appears that appellant, having been advised by counsel and informed by the court as to the effect and consequences of his guilty plea, voluntarily and with knowledge of such consequences, plead guilty to the offense. Resultantly, the plea of guilty was valid. See Thomas v. State, Fla.App.1967, 201 So.2d 834. Appellant’s attorney has submitted to this court a very well written brief and has cited sufficient authority if the facts were true to cause this court to reverse the trial judge; but the record as cited above is clear and from that record it appears that appellant knowingly, intelligently and with knowledge of the consequences plead guilty to the crime for which he was sentenced.
We therefore affirm.
PIERCE, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Estes v. State, 294 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)…d by counsel and that the guilty plea was the product of plea-bargaining arrangements between the State and the defendant. We implied’ as much in Wilson v. Wainwright, Fla.App., 248 So. 2d 249. Our sister court so held in Johnson v. State, Fla.App., 248 So. 2d 225.” (Emphasis supplied.) While we recognize that Rule 3.-170(j) of the Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure was fashioned after Federal Criminal Procedure Rule 11 which was construed by the United States Supreme Court in McCarthy v. United States, 394…
-
Mower v. State, 308 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)…endant was represented by counsel and that the guilty plea was the product of plea-bargaining arrangements between the State and the defendant. We implied as much in Wilson v. Wainwright, 248 So. 2d 249. Our sister court so held in Johnson v. State, 248 So. 2d 225.” (254 So. 2d at page 24) In the latter we said: “The sole question before us is whether the trial court committed reversible error when it accepted the defendant’s plea of guilty without advising him of his constitutional rights to remain silent.…
-
Williams v. State, 259 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)…by counsel and that the guilty plea was the product of plea-bargaining arrangements between the State and the defendant. We implied as much in Wilson v. Wainwright [Fla.App.], 248 So. 2d 249. Our sister court so held in Johnson v. State [Fla.App.], 248 So. 2d 225.” This record reflects that Williams’ privately-employed counsel bargained for him well in that he procured a nolle prosequi of a grand larceny count and negotiated probation for the remaining count charging a felony in return for a plea of guilty.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Thomas v. State, 201 So. 2d 834 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)