JOHNNY CANNON, 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.
A procedural rule violation does not require reversal unless the defendant demonstrates prejudice or manifest injustice.
Defendant pleaded guilty to possession of heroin and was sentenced to two years. He appeals, claiming the trial court failed to establish a factual ba…
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 Prejudice To Defendant cases and more on FLexlaw
MILLS, Judge.
Appellant-defendant seeks reversal of his conviction, entered pursuant to a plea of guilty, for possession of heroin, and a two-year sentence thereon. The sole ground for reversal is that the trial court erred in accepting defendant’s plea of guilty without determining that there was a factual basis for the plea as required by Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(j).
Violation of a procedural rule does not call for reversal of a conviction unless the record discloses that noncompliance resulted in prejudice to the defendant. Richardson v. State, 246 So. 2d 771 (Fla.1971).
A defendant has the burden of proving prejudice or manifest injustice. Defendant here does not contend nor does the record show that he was prejudiced or manifest injustice resulted.
The record presented to us clearly reflects :
1. defendant voluntarily entered the plea;
2. defendant understood the consequences ;
3.pursuant to plea bargaining, the trial court agreed to and did impose a two-year sentence though the maximum penalty was five years.
Affirmed on authority of Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975).
BOYER, C. J., and McCORD, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. State, 500 So. 2d 125 (Fla. 1986)…5 (Fla.1958) (vaguely worded charging document); Clair v. State, 406 So. 2d 109, 110 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981) (violation of Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.220); Miller v. State, 373 So. 2d 377, 378 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979) (violation of Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.220); Cannon v. State, 317 So. 2d 459, 460 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) (violation of Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.170(j)); Broeck v. State, 317 So. 2d 100, 100 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) (violation of Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.170(j)); Vena v. State, 295 So. 2d 720, 722 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974) (violation of Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.220),…
-
Leeman v. State, 357 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 1978)
-
Luckie Stradtman v. State, 334 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…record in this case, the trial court erred in allowing into evidence statements and testimony about the admissions made by him. See State v. Coney, Fla. 1973, 294 So. 2d 82; Adkins v. Smith, Fla. 1968, 205 So. 2d 530; Cannon v. State, Fla. App.1975, 317 So. 2d 459; Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1974, 292 So. 2d 375; and Rule 3.220 Rules of Criminal Procedure, 33 F.S.A. After a consideration of the record, all points in the briefs, and arguments of counsel in the light of the controlling principles of law, for the…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Richardson v. State, 246 So. 2d 771 (Fla. 1971)
- Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1975)