JEAN R. SAINT AIME, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1998-12-09
No. 98-0969
Before COPE, GERSTEN, and SHEVIN, JJ.
723 So. 2d 874 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1998) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that the defendant's claims regarding misadvice from counsel and interpreter were without merit, as they stemmed from a mistaken belief about the charges he faced.


Facts & Procedural History

The defendant was charged with felony murder and aggravated child abuse, but pleaded no contest to second-degree murder in exchange for a reduced char…

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.


Other
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Upon the State’s motion for rehearing we withdraw the opinion in this matter dated August 19, 1998, and substitute the following.

Defendant-appellant Jean R. Saint Aime appeals the denial of his Rule 3.850 motion based upon claims that he was misadvised by his counsel and his interpreter in connection with a plea agreement. We affirm.

In 1995, defendant was charged with felony murder and aggravated child abuse in connection with the death of his daughter. The child died after defendant severely struck her with a car door. The felony murder charge was a charge of first-degree murder as established in section 782.04(1), Florida Statutes (1995). First-degree murder is a capital crime punishable by death or life in prison.

In 1996, defendant entered a plea of no contest to the charge of second-degree murder, in exchange for (a) a reduction of the first-degree murder charge to second-degree murder, and (b) a nolle pros of the aggravated child abuse charge. Defendant was sentenced to seventeen and one-third years in prison with credit for time served.

In 1997, defendant filed a 3.850 motion raising several issues: 1) counsel misadvised him about the maximum penalty he faced; 2) the trial court failed to advise defendant of the possible deportation consequences of his plea; 3) his plea was not voluntary because defendant was not apprised of the true nature of the charges or of the nature of the plea; 4) his plea was not voluntary because the interpreter failed to communicate his desire to plead to a lesser charge; 5) the trial court failed to establish a factual basis for the plea; and 6) counsel was ineffective for allowing the plea to be accepted without a factual basis.

In general, defendant’s claims spring from his mistaken belief that the charge against him was second-degree murder. Defendant’s motion states: “In the instant ease defendant initially considered entering a plea to a lesser charge based on defense counsel’s misadviee that if he went to trial on the charge of second-degree murder and was convicted by a jury on that charge he could receive the death penalty.” Clearly, defendant has misconstrued the facts as to the nature of the charge he was facing. As defendant was facing a first-degree murder charge, a capital felony, the possible penalties were death or life without parole. See § 775.082(1), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1994); id. § 782.04(l)(a) (1993).*

Defendant’s related claim that the interpreter failed to properly convey his intentions also arises from defendant’s mistaken belief that he was only charged with second-degree murder. In his motion, defendant states “[t]he defendant only considered entering a plea to a lesser charge such as manslaughter; but not second-degree murder and the interpreter was well aware of this but refused to convey this to the trial court.” In reality, defendant was charged with first-degree murder, and the second-degree murder charge was a lesser charge. The plea colloquy reflects that defendant’s counsel had discussed the fact that the second-degree murder offer was a reduced charge with defendant prior to the entry of the plea. We see no reasonable basis for defendant’s claim that the translation was faulty.

As to defendant’s claim that there was no factual basis for the plea, the arrest affidavit was a part of the record and, contrary to defendant’s argument, it sufficiently sets forth a factual basis for the charge of second-degree murder, including that defendant had committed “an act imminently dangerous to another and evincing a depraved mind regardless of human life.” § 782.04(2), Fla. Stat. (1993); see Blackwood v. State, 648 So. 2d 294, 295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). As there was a sufficient factual basis for the plea, defendant’s corresponding claim of ineffective assistance of counsel by allowing a plea in the absence of such also fails.

Finally, the transcript of the plea colloquy demonstrates that defendant was advised of the possibility of deportation.

Affirmed.

*

The date of the crime was September 16, 1995.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Johanne Cuevas v. State, 770 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)
    …ading to. See Wuornos, 676 So. 2d at 969 (“The colloquy between the trial court and Wournos is not a model, but it nevertheless is apparent from the overall thrust of the conversation that Wournos knew the import of the plea.”); Saint Aime v. State, 723 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998) (rejecting defendant’s Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 claim that there was no factual basis for the plea where the arrest affidavit was a part of the record and sufficiently set forth a factual basis for the charge), rev…
  • Gomez v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)
  • Woods v. Dep't of Corr. (M.D. Fla. 2020)
    …udge’s discretion. Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267, 272-73 (Fla. 1975). The Court may rely on arrest and police affidavits to find a factual basis for a plea. Cuevas v. State, 770 So. 2d 703, 704 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000); see Saint Aime v. State, 723 So. 2d 874 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Blackwood v. State, 648 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Courts need not conduct a “mini-trial” to find a sufficient factual basis for a guilty plea, but may make reasonable inferences based on facts in the record that…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw