G. M. K., A CHILD, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was adjudicated to be a delinquent child based upon a plea of nolo con-tendere entered by his attorney. The record does not reflect that the court made any determination that the plea had been made voluntarily and with understanding of the nature of the allegations as required by R.J.P. 8.080(a)(1). Cf. Boykin v. Alabama, 1969, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274. Therefore, this case is hereby remanded with the request that the court hold a hearing for the purpose of determining whether the plea was voluntarily made with an understanding of the nature of the allegations and for such further proceedings as may be appropriate, depending upon the outcome of this determination.
McNULTY, C. J., and HOBSON and GRIMES, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Royal v. Parado, 462 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)…inarily rescind an instrument only for fraud, accident or mistake, and not because of the mere want or failure of consideration; an action for damages at law is usually considered adequate where failure of consideration exists. Rennolds v. Rennolds, 312 So. 2d 538, 541 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). Here, the trial court’s order and subsequent final judgment predicates the granting of the remedy of rescission on failure of consideration occasioned by appellants’ actions culminating in the events of August 12, 1981. The…
-
Duncan Props., Inc. v. KEY Largo Ocean View, Inc., 360 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)…basis of a want or failure of consideration. Generally, without the accompaniment of one of the aforementioned grounds, want or failure of consideration will not suffice to permit a cancellation or rescission of an instrument. Rennolds v. Rennolds, 312 So. 2d 538 (Fla.2d DCA 1975); 5 Fla.Jur. Cancellation, Reformation, Etc. § 26. The usual remedy for failure of consideration, standing alone, is an action at law for damages. Richard Bertram & Co. v. Barrett, supra; Rennolds v. Rennolds, supra. Notwithstandin…
-
Cintas Corp. NO. 2 v. Schwalier, 901 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…t alone sufficient to support a claim for rescission or cancellation of a contract; an action for damages is an adequate remedy. See 9 Fla. Jur.2d CANCELLATION § 29; see also Royal v. Parado, 462 So. 2d 849 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Rennolds v. Rennolds, 312 So. 2d 538 (Fla. 2d DCA 1975). A promise, no matter how slight, qualifies as consideration if the promisor agrees to do something that he or she is not already obligated to do. See Diaz v. Rood, 851 So. 2d 843 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Here, the consideration for t…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238 (U.S. 1969)