JULIUS HAMILTON, 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.
Julius Hamilton appealed his guilty plea convictions for robbery, challenging the validity of his plea and his sentences. The court affirmed the convictions but remanded for reduction of sentences to provide credit for pretrial jail time under a newly effective Florida statute.
The court held that Hamilton's guilty plea was knowingly, intelligently, and understandingly made upon advice of counsel. The court also held that under the newly effective 1973 amendment to Florida law, Hamilton must receive credit for time spent in jail awaiting trial, requiring remand for sentence reduction.
[1] A guilty plea is considered knowing, intelligent, and understanding when made upon the advice of counsel.
[2] Appellate courts apply the law in effect at the time of the appellate decision, even if it differs from the law at the time of the trial court's original ruling.
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 remand this case for the sole purpose of permitting the trial court to correct the sentences pursuant to the statute, supra, in which it is required that the appellant be given credit for time spent in jail awaiting trial”
The court's holding that the newly effective 1973 statute required credit for pretrial incarceration
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn March 5, 1971, Hamilton was sentenced to concurrent thirty-year terms in state prison without credit for time spent in jail awaiting trial after pl…
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 Retroactive Application Of Sentencing Statutes cases and more on FLexlaw
BOARDMAN, Judge.-
Appellant, Julius Hamilton, seeks reversal of judgments and sentences imposed upon him pursuant to his guilty pleas to the charges of robbery, in this Baggett 1 appeal. On March S, 1971, the trial judge sentenced appellant to serve concurrent thirty-year terms in state prison without credit for time previously spent in jail awaiting trial.
We have considered the complete record, applicable statutory authority and decisional law and find that appellant has not demonstrated reversible error. .We are convinced after a study of the colloquy of the hearing at the time appellant pled guilty to the offense with which he had been charged that he did so upon advice of counsel and that the said plea was knowingly, intelligently and understandingly made by him. His contention to the contrary is without merit.
The other point raised by appellant on appeal does have merit. It concerns the matter of his reduction of sentence. We find that Chapter 73-71, Laws of Florida, 1973, amending Florida Statutes, Section 921.161(1), became effective after the trial judge sentenced the appellant. Under these circumstances, the applicable Florida law dictates that this court apply the law applicable at the time the appeal was decided. See Hollingshead v. State, Fla.App. 1st, 1974, 292 So. 2d 617, and Joins v. State, Fla.App.1st, 1974, 287 So. 2d 742, cited therein.
Accordingly, we remand this case for the sole purpose of permitting the trial court to correct the sentences pursuant to the statute, supra, in which it is required that the appellant be given credit for time spent in jail awaiting trial. It is pointed out the judgments and sentences entered by the trial coürt on March 5, 1971, were consistent and in accordance with existing law. The judgments and sentences are affirmed and the case remanded with directions to the trial court to reduce the sentences as indicated herein. This action may be-taken by the trial court without the appellant appearing before the court.
Affirmed and remanded for reduction of sentences.
McNULTY, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur. . Baggett v. Wainwright, Fla.1969, 229 So. 2d 239.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnson v. State, 371 So. 2d 556 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)…ormally presumed to apply prospectively, procedural changes are to be applied to pending cases. Heilmann v. State, 310 So. 2d 376 (Fla.2d DCA 1975); McShay v. State, supra. See also Hall v. State, 358 So. 2d 891 (Fla.2d DCA 1978); Hamilton v. State, 306 So. 2d 600 (Fla.2d DCA 1975). The trial court’s failure to comply with the requirements of Section 39.111(6) [*558] cannot be deemed harmless in the instant case. The trial court failed to justify its decision to impose adult sanctions against appellant excep…
-
Heilmann v. State, 310 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975)…cases pending on direct appeal.4 Thus, the courts have applied Fla.Stat. § 921.161(1), as amended, to cases on direct appeal even though the change became effective after imposition of sentence by the trial court. Hamilton v. State, Fla.App.2d 1975, 306 So. 2d 600; Hollingshead v. State, Fla.App.1st 1974, 292 So. 2d 617; Joins v. State, Fla.App.1st 1974, 287 So. 2d 742; Gallagher v. State, Fla.App.4th 1974, 300 So. 2d 299. A rule 3.850 proceeding, however, is a collateral proceeding, independent of the origi…
-
Waters v. Louie L. Wainwright, 316 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)…he spent in the county jail before sentence.” In light of the requirements of this statute, we vacate the sentence and remand with respectful instructions to resentence defendant giving him credit for time served in the county jail. Hamilton State, 306 So. 2d 600 (2d DCA Fla.1975); Hollingshead v. State, 292 So. 2d 617 (1st DCA Fla.1974). Affirmed in part, reversed in part, with directions. OWEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Baggett v. Louie L. Wainwright, 229 So. 2d 239 (Fla. 1969)
- Joins v. State, 287 So. 2d 742 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Hollingshead v. State, 292 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)