JAMES LAWRENCE THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1973-02-28
No. 71-205
Reed, C.J., Owen, J., Mager, J.
273 So. 2d 773 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1973) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

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.

Synopsis

Florida appellate court reversed a nolo contendere conviction because the trial court failed to conduct an adequate plea colloquy demonstrating the defendant's plea was voluntary under Rule 3.170(a), F.R.Cr.P.


Holding

A trial court must conduct a sufficient plea colloquy that affirmatively demonstrates a defendant's nolo contendere plea was voluntarily made, not merely infer voluntariness from the record.


Headnotes

[1] A trial court's acceptance of a nolo contendere plea must be supported by a plea colloquy that affirmatively demonstrates the defendant's plea was voluntarily made, not m…

Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Defendant Thomas entered a nolo contendere plea to a lesser included offense as a result of plea bargaining. The trial court conducted a brief colloqu…

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
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant alleges that the trial court erred in accepting his plea of nolo con-tendere without first determining whether such plea was voluntarily made.1 Although it might be inferred from the record that defendant’s plea of nolo con-tendere to a lesser included offense as a result of plea bargaining was freely and voluntarily made, the plea colloquy when viewed under the requirements of our plea rule does not demonstrate that defendant’s plea was voluntary. See Rule 3.170(a), F.R.Cr.P.2 See also Costello v. State, Fla.1972, 260 So.2d 198; Russell v. State, Fla.App.1970, 233 So.2d 148; McPherson v. State, Fla.App.1970, 237 So.2d 18. Cf. Kelly v. State, Fla.App.1971, 254 So.2d 22.

The judgment appealed from is reversed with directions to set aside the plea of nolo contendere as entered with the entry of a new plea and further proceedings in accordance therewith.

Reversed.

REED, C. J., and OWEN and MAGER, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Wooff v. State, 303 So. 2d 49 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
    …e voluntarily made free from any threat, intimidation, coercion, promise or inducement of any kind, and with full understanding of the significance of the pleas. Rentfrow v. State, Fla.App.4th 1974, 293 So. 2d 376; Thomas v. State, Fla.App.4th 1973, 273 So. 2d 773; Russell v. State, Fla.App.4th 1970, 233 So. 2d 148. The judgment and sentence are reversed and the cause remanded to the trial court with directions to set aside the pleas of nolo contendere and to permit Wooff to plead anew on both charges. Reve…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw