RALPH HOPKINS, 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.
Ralph Hopkins challenged his conviction and five-year sentence for lewd, lascivious or indecent assault upon a child following a guilty plea. The appellate court affirmed the conviction after finding no merit to his claim of coercion and no arguable grounds for reversal.
The court affirmed the judgment and sentence, finding that the record colloquy demonstrated Hopkins entered the plea knowingly and understandingly in compliance with Rule 3.170(a), and that no arguable grounds existed for reversal.
[1] A guilty plea entered pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement is valid if the defendant enters the plea knowingly and understandingly.
[2] An appellate court may affirm a judgment and sentence when it finds no reversible error in the record.
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 intelligence“was denied due process of law in that he was coerced into entering a plea of guilty”
Hopkins's sole assignment of error on appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHopkins was charged under Florida Statutes Section 800.04 with lewd, lascivious or indecent assault or act upon or in the presence of a child. He ente…
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 Anders V. California Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, Ralph Hopkins, was charged in an amended information of lewd, lascivious or indecent assault or act upon or in the presence of a child in violation of Section 800.04, Florida Statutes, F. S.A. Appellant entered a plea of guilty to the charges based on a negotiated plea. The appellant was represented at that proceeding by an assistant public defender. Appellant was thereupon sentenced, according to the negotiated plea, to serve a term of five years in the state prison with credit being given for time served in the county jail.
Subsequently, notice of appeal was filed in this court to review the judgment and sentence. The public defender filed a brief in this court in behalf of Ralph Hopkins.
After reviewing the facts contained in the record the public defender states in his brief that he “. . . can find nothing which could arguably support an appeal. Whereupon, he requested to be relieved as attorney of record for appellant under the rationale of Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493. The record shows that the clerk of this court, on February 9, 1973, caused to be mailed to appellant an order advising him that within 30 days, if he so desired, he could file a brief with this court submitting any matter that he deemed advisable in connection with this appeal. To date we have not received a brief or response from the appellant.
The only significant assignment of error raised by appellant in this appeal was that he “. . . was denied due process of law in that he was coerced into entering a plea of guilty.” The colloquy in the record before us between the trial judge, the Honorable Marvin E. Silverman, and appellant indicates beyond any question of doubt that appellant entered the plea of guilty knowingly and understandingly as provided in Rule 3.170(a), RCrP, 33 F.S.A.
We have carefully examined the entire record on file here on behalf of appellant, Hopkins, and find nothing therein sufficient to justify a reversal of the trial court’s action and, therefore, the judgment and sentence appealed is hereby
Affirmed.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Monroe Holmes v. State, 374 So. 2d 944 (Fla. 1979)…evidence that defendant understood and voluntarily entered his plea of guilty came from his own lips when the court asked whether any threats were made to force him to plea and defendant replied, “No, Sir. I make it willingly.” See Hopkins v. State, 275 So. 2d 597 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973); Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975). Thereafter on June 6, 1974, an evidentiary hearing was held on the issue of aggravating and mitigating circumstances. After this hearing the original defense counsel resigned from th…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)