DENNIS CHARLES HARWOOD, 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.
Dennis Harwood appealed his guilty plea conviction on two drug-related charges. The court affirmed the conviction but flagged a potential issue regarding whether the judge's statement about maximum sentencing was accurate, allowing Harwood to challenge the plea later if it was based on erroneous legal information.
The court affirmed the guilty plea on the record as it was not shown to be unintelligent or involuntary, but without prejudice to Harwood's right to file a petition under Florida Criminal Procedure Rule 3.850 if he can demonstrate his plea was not knowing and voluntary based on erroneous information about sentencing.
[1] A guilty plea is considered intelligently and voluntarily entered when there is no showing to the contrary.
[2] A defendant may challenge a guilty plea by filing a petition under CrPR 3.850 if the plea was based on erroneous information.
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“We affirm on the record before us because there is no showing that the plea was not intelligently and voluntarily entered.”
Establishes the standard for reviewing guilty pleas and the finding that the plea met this standard
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHarwood pleaded guilty to two counts: possession of marijuana in felony quantity and possession of narcotics paraphernalia. He negotiated the plea wit…
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 Cumulative Punishment cases and more on FLexlaw
MANN, Chief Judge.
We have before us an appeal from a judgment entered on a guilty plea to two counts, one charging possession of marijuana in a quantity constituting a felony and the other charging possession of narcotics paraphernalia. Harwood negotiated a plea of guilty to both charges with the understanding that he would not be sentenced to more than five years. We affirm on the record before us because there is no showing that the plea was not intelligently and voluntarily entered. There is however a matter of concern which Har-wood is at liberty to raise by petition filed under CrPR. 3.850, 33 F.S.A., if his plea was based on erroneous information. The trial judge stated, during a patiently conducted colloquy, that “there could be a maximum of ten years on this charge.” If these charges were independent and cumulatively punishable, this would be a correct statement of the possible maximum sentence to which Harwood was subjected. On the other hand, it is possible that these charges are such intertwined aspects of the same transaction that they are punishable by only one sentence for the graver of fense. It is possible, therefore, that the maximum penalty Harwood faced was five years rather than ten and that consequently a bargained plea for five years may have been entered without an understanding of this aspect of the law. We have most recently discussed the matter in Edmond v. State, Fla.App.2d 1973, 280 So. 2d 449. See also, Foster v. State, Fla.1973, 286 So. 2d 549, opinion filed December 5, 1973. For the reasons stated in the concurring opinion in Jackson v. State, Fla.App.2d 1973, 283 So. 2d 390, we affirm without prejudice to the appellant’s right to file a petition under CrPR. 3.850 if he alleges that his guilty plea was not a knowing and voluntary one.
Affirmed.
McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Foster v. State, 286 So. 2d 549 (Fla. 1973)
- Ellis Edmond v. State, 280 So. 2d 449 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)
- Jackson v. State, 283 So. 2d 390 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)