J. C. MOORE, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed defendant's guilty plea to rape where the trial court adequately informed him of the crime's definition, his right to jury trial, and obtained his affirmation that he understood the charges and was guilty without coercion.
A guilty plea is valid when the trial court defines the crime, informs the defendant of his jury trial right, and obtains his affirmation that he understands the charges and is guilty without pressure.
[1] A guilty plea is valid when the trial court informs the defendant of the crime's definition and his right to jury trial, and obtains his affirmation that he understands t…
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 intelligenceDefendant withdrew his not guilty plea and entered a guilty plea to rape. The trial court defined rape, informed him of his jury trial right, and ques…
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 Guilty Plea Validity cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant, with able assistance of counsel, withdrew a previous plea of not guilty to the crime of rape and entered a plea of guilty instead. Defendant was asked if the plea of guilty was in accordance with his wish to which he responded in the affirmative. The court then carefully defined the crime of rape and informed the defendant that he was entitled to a jury trial. The defendant responded that he understood the definition of the crime with which he was charged and that, in fact, he was guilty of the crime. He also, in response to questions from the court, stated that he had not been mistreated nor pressured. He now appeals, alleging as his sole point that the trial court erred in accepting his plea of guilty without first determining that such plea was voluntary and with full knowledge that in so pleading “he would waive numerous and substantial rights and privileges”, citing Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274. We affirm on authority of North Carolina v. Alfrod, 400 U.S. 25, 91 S.Ct. 160, 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970); Seville v. State, Fla.App. 1st 1974, 291 So. 2d 256 and Mower v. State, Fla. App. 1st 1974, 308 So. 2d 586, and the cases therein cited.
RAWLS, C. J., and BOYER and Mc-CORD, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Perez v. State, 351 So. 2d 384 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…minary hearing provided a factual basis for the plea. Thus, the judge properly accepted the guilty plea. See Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.170(j) and Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975); Mower v. State, 308 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Moore v. State, 308 So. 2d 590 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). Defendant now argues that the judge should have made a second inquiry when he stated during the sentencing hearing that he did not rape the girl. A factual basis for the guilty plea was determined by the judge at the time of the…
Authorities Cited
- Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (U.S. 1969)
- North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25 (U.S. 1970)
- Mower v. State, 308 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
- Beville v. State, 291 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Linton E. Wilson v. State of Fla. ex rel. Louie L. Wainwright, 291 So. 2d 256 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)