THOMAS M. BRYANT, 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.
Appellant challenges guilty plea convictions for three counts of petit larceny, alleging his court-appointed attorney coerced him into pleading guilty by misrepresenting that sentences would run concurrently with an unrelated sentence. The appellate court remanded for the trial court to determine whether the pleas were voluntarily entered.
The court held that the guilty pleas must be assessed for voluntariness and remanded the case for the trial court to determine whether appellant's allegations of coercion and false promises by his attorney are true. If the trial court finds the allegations true, the appellant should be allowed to withdraw his pleas; if it finds them false, the case should be returned for appeal.
[1] A guilty plea is involuntary if induced by promises that are not kept or threats that vitiate its voluntary character.
[2] Before accepting a guilty plea, a trial judge must ensure the plea is voluntarily entered, free from threats or coercion.
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“Before accepting a guilty plea, the trial judge must satisfy himself that the plea is voluntarily entered to insure that the plea is made of the defendant's own free will without threats or coercion.”
Establishes the constitutional and procedural requirement for trial courts to inquire into voluntariness before accepting guilty pleas.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was charged by information with three counts of grand larceny. He initially entered a not guilty plea but later appeared with counsel and re…
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 Appeal From Judgment And Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant appeals the judgment and sentence for three counts of petit larceny. He was charged by information with three counts of grand larceny. Appellant entered a plea of not guilty to the charges. Subsequently, he appeared before the court with his attorney and requested to enter pleas of guilty to the offenses of petit larceny. The court was informed that negotiations had not been made with the State.
The court then questioned the appellant but made no inquiry relating to the voluntariness of the pleas. The pleas were thereafter accepted.
Appellant alleges that he was induced by his court-appointed attorney to enter his pleas of guilty. He contends his attorney informed him that if he pleaded guilty to the charges, the sentences imposed would run concurrently with the prison sentence to be imposed on another charge to which the appellant had previously entered a plea of guilty. If these allegations were true, such would lead to a conclusion that the pleas were involuntary. Cooley v. State, 245 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Roberts v. United States, 486 F. 2d 980 (5th Cir. 1973). The record does not refute the allegation that the pleas were entered due to coercion or promises. Cf. Scarborough v. State, 278 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973); Pierce v. State, 318 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975).
Before accepting a guilty plea, the trial judge must satisfy himself that the plea is voluntarily entered to insure that the plea is made of the defendant’s own free will without threats or coercion. See Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla.1975). If a guilty plea is induced by promises which are not kept or threats which vitiate the voluntary character of such act, the plea is void. Machibroda v. United States, 368 U.S. 487, 82 S.Ct. 510, 7 L.Ed.2d 473 (1962).
Since there is nothing in the record to refute appellant’s allegation, we relinquish jurisdiction of this cause and remand it to the trial court for a period of thirty (30) days in order that the court may make a determination of whether or not the pleas were voluntarily made. After a hearing, the trial court shall determine the truth of the appellant’s allegations — whether or not the appellant’s guilty pleas were induced by the aforesaid alleged representation of the Public Defender. If the trial court finds the appellant’s allegations to be true, appellant should be allowed to withdraw his guilty pleas and a certified copy of the court’s order should be thereafter forthwith forwarded by the clerk of the trial court to the clerk of this court. If the trial court should find otherwise, a certified copy of that order should in like manner be forthwith forwarded to this court.
REMANDED with directions as aforesaid.
McCORD, C. J., and BOYER and SMITH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Livingston v. State, 376 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)…of appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing is reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s allegation that his plea was coerced by threats made by his court-appointed attorney. Bryant v. State, 355 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Acting C. J. and ERVIN, J., concur. BOOTH, J., dissents.…
-
Hightower v. State, 650 So. 2d 1086 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…legation that trial counsel or the trial court erroneously led the defendant to believe that he or she would serve two separate sentences concurrently rather than consecutively, states a prima facie case for relief under rule 3.850. Bryant v. State, 355 So. 2d 497 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Schroeder v. State, 641 So. 2d 947 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994); Allen v. State, 616 So. 2d 625 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993); Patterson v. State, 611 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Jackson v. State, 442 So. 2d 1070 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). The trial co…
Authorities Cited
- MacHibroda v. United States, 368 U.S. 487 (U.S. 1962)
- Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1975)
- Pierce v. State, 318 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
- Artis Scarborough v. State, 278 So. 2d 657 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)
- Robert R. D. v. Cooley, 245 So. 2d 679 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- Roberts v. United States, 486 F.2d 980 (5th Cir. 1973)