WILLIS EARL YOUNGBLOOD, 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 denying an evidentiary hearing based solely on countervailing affidavits is impermissible when a defendant claims his guilty plea was based on a misunderstanding.
Youngblood alleged his guilty plea was based on the understanding that charges would be dropped if he committed no other crimes for two years, but 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 Affidavit cases and more on FLexlaw
Youngblood’s postconviction petition alleges that his guilty plea was entered solely upon the understanding that the charge would be placed on the absentee docket and dropped if Youngblood were not “found guilty of any other charges for a period of not less than two years, and, as shown by the records, the defendant was not found guilty of any crime until 26 days after the specified time imposed.” The second crime referred to had been committed prior to the expiration of two years. He also alleges that he was not advised of the consequences of his plea and is entitled to have the sentence and adjudication vacated on authority of Wade v. Wainwright, 5th Cir. 1969, 420 F.2d 898.
No evidentiary hearing was held. Youngblood’s trial counsel furnished an affidavit that he was present at sentencing and that the trial judge did not in any particular limit the time during which adjudication of guilt was held in abeyance. No mention is made of Youngblood’s claim of ignorance of the consequences of his plea.
So what we have is Youngblood’s affidavit and his attorney’s affidavit and the *868trial judge’s denial of a plainly required evidentiary hearing on the strength of a countervailing affidavit. This is impermissible. See Sampson v. State, Fla.App.2d 1963, 158 So.2d 771.
Reversed and remanded for evidentiary ’ hearing.
PIERCE, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Borland v. State, 848 So. 2d 1288 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…tory to the allegations sworn as true by the movant. As such, it would be subject to confrontation at an evidentiary hearing.” Clark, 662 So. 2d at 730; accord Cintron v. State, 508 So. 2d 1315, 1316 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); see also Youngblood v. State, 261 So. 2d 867, 867-68 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972) (holding that the trial court could not deny an evidentiary hearing on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel based on the strength of a countervailing affidavit from the defendant’s attorney). If the trial court de…
-
Shaffner v. State, 562 So. 2d 430 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990)…tion which indicated that appellant was not entitled to relief, it was not part of the file and record in the case. See Robinson v. State, 516 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); McCorkle v. State, 419 So. 2d 373 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); Youngblood v. State, 261 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1972). Nevertheless, the order denying the motion is affirmable for another reason. The motion was facially insufficient. Even assuming that a prisoner is entitled to relief under Rule 3.850 where his attorney makes a misstatement of…
-
Cintron v. State, 504 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)…d records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief.” The phrase “files and records,” as employed in the rule, has been interpreted as excluding matters dehors the official court record. See, e.g., Youngblood v. State, 261 So. 2d 867 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972); Williams v. State, 163 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964). In Sampson v. State, 158 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963), the trial court attached to its order certain items apparently submitted ex parte in response to the motion but which w…
Authorities Cited
- Arthur v. Sampson, 158 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
- Carroll E. Wade v. Louie L. Wainwright, 420 F.2d 898 (5th Cir. 1969)