MARHLAU BELIZIARE
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. 3d DCA | 2024-07-10
No. 2023-1717
Hirsch, J., Emas, J., Scales, J., Bokor, J.
2024 FL 8294 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (2024)

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

A plea may be vacated based on newly discovered evidence only if the defendant satisfies a two-pronged test analogous to Strickland v. Washington, considering the totality of circumstances including the likelihood of success of available defenses and the difference between the plea sentence and maximum possible sentence.


Headnotes

[1] A motion to vacate a guilty plea based on newly discovered evidence is evaluated under a two-pronged test analogous to Strickland v. …

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 intelligence

Key Quotes

“[I]n determining whether a reasonable probability exist that the defendant would have insisted on going to trial, a court should consider the totality of the circumstances surrounding the plea, including factors such as whether a particular defense was likely to succeed at trial, the colloquy between the defendant and the trial court at the time of the plea, and the difference between the sentence imposed under the plea and the maximum possible sentence the defendant faced at trial.”

Grosvenor v. State standard for evaluating newly discovered evidence claims in plea vacation motions

Facts & Procedural History

Marhlau Beliziare appealed from a circuit court order denying his motion to vacate his guilty plea based on newly discovered evidence. The case involv…

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.

Opinion of the Court
Bokor

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed July 10, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-1717 Lower Tribunal No. F07-17556 ________________

Marhlau Beliziare, Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, Appellee.

An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Milton Hirsch, Judge.

Daniel J. Tibbitt, P.A., and Daniel Tibbitt, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and David Llanes, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, SCALES and BOKOR, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

2

Affirmed. See Long v. State, 183 So. 3d 342 (Fla. 2016) (adopting twopronged test, analogous to that of Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984), to determine whether a plea should be vacated based on a claim of newly-discovered evidence); Grosvenor v. State, 874 So. 2d 1176, 1181-82 (Fla. 2004) (“[I]n determining whether a reasonable probability exist that the defendant would have insisted on going to trial, a court should consider the totality of the circumstances surrounding the plea, including factors such as whether a particular defense was likely to succeed at trial, the colloquy between the defendant and the trial court at the time of the plea, and the difference between the sentence imposed under the plea and the maximum possible sentence the defendant faced at trial.”)


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw