Knowing And Intelligent Waiver

865 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 197 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Trenton M. Herron v. State
  113 So. 3d 852· Fla. 2d DCA· 2012-02-17 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the trial court committed per se reversible error by failing to hold a hearing on the defendant's unequivocal request to represent himself.
• Thompson v. State
  37 So. 3d 939· Fla. 2d DCA· 2010-06-11 ·cited 9×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The appellate court reversed the revocation of a probationer's probation because the circuit court erred in denying his constitutional right to represent himself, despite concerns about his legal knowledge.
• Montgomery v. State
  1 So. 3d 1228· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-02-06 ·cited 9×
  Dale Montgomery appeals the revocation of his probation and resulting ten-year prison sentence after he discharged his counsel and represented himself pro se. The Florida appellate court reversed because the trial court failed to conduct adequate Nelson and Faretta hearings befor
• United States v. Melancon
  972 F.2d 566· 5th Cir.· 1992-09-03 ·cited 9×
  A defendant may waive their statutory right to appeal their sentence as part of a valid plea agreement, and such waivers are enforceable if informed and voluntary.
• Shuler v. State
  463 So. 2d 464· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-02-06 ·cited 9×
  Defendant's conviction for dealing in stolen property is reversed because the trial court failed to establish a valid waiver of jury trial through either written waiver or personal inquiry on the record.
• United States v. Anderson
  704 F.2d 117· 3d Cir.· 1983-04-06 ·cited 9×
  A district court's failure to conduct a colloquy before accepting a written jury trial waiver in a criminal case does not mandate reversal, especially when the waiver is otherwise knowing and intelligent.
• Bontempo v. Fenton
  692 F.2d 954· 3d Cir.· 1982-11-16 ·cited 9×
  The court held that the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel was violated because he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel when he made an unsworn statement to the jury.
• Winters v. Cook
  466 F.2d 1393· 5th Cir.· 1972-09-20 ·cited 9×
  A guilty plea does not waive the right to challenge jury composition if the defendant was unaware of that right.
• COX v. State
  26 So. 3d 666· Fla. 4th DCA· 2010-01-27 ·cited 8×
  Dennis Cox appeals his convictions for robbery with a firearm and attempted second-degree murder after law enforcement obtained incriminating statements in violation of his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. The court reversed, finding that detectives deliberately created a false
• Ezekiel Register v. State
  946 So. 2d 50· Fla. 1st DCA· 2006-12-15 ·cited 8×
  Florida appellate court reversed an involuntary commitment order because the trial court failed to conduct proper inquiry into whether the patient's waiver of presence at the commitment hearing was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary.
• Bryon Reddick v. State
  937 So. 2d 1279· Fla. 4th DCA· 2006-10-04 ·cited 8×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  Bryon Reddick was convicted of cocaine trafficking and cannabis possession after a jury trial. On appeal, the Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded because the trial court improperly denied Reddick's motions to proceed pro se by focusing on his competence rather t
• Potts v. State
  698 So. 2d 315· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-07-30 ·cited 8×
  Joseph Henry Potts was convicted of sale of cocaine after representing himself at trial. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed his conviction and addressed the proper scope of inquiry required under Faretta v. California when a defendant seeks to waive counsel and represen
• Mason v. State
  654 So. 2d 1225· Fla. 2d DCA· 1995-05-05 ·cited 8×
  Keith Mason appeals convictions for grand theft and uttering a forged check. The court dismisses the grand theft appeal for lack of jurisdiction but reverses the forged check conviction due to the trial court's failure to conduct a Richardson hearing after the state failed to dis
• Dortch v. State
  651 So. 2d 154· Fla. 1st DCA· 1995-02-16 ·cited 8×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  A trial court's inquiry into a defendant's waiver of counsel must specifically advise the defendant of the seriousness of the charges against him, the potential sentence if found guilty, and the consequences of habitualization before permitting self-representation.
• Fletcher Berry v. State
  636 So. 2d 555· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-05-06 ·cited 8×
  Fletcher Berry appeals his conviction and sentence for cocaine possession after being charged as an adult despite being a minor at the time of the offense. The court affirms the denial of his suppression motion but reverses his sentence, finding procedural defects in how the tria
• Lewis v. Huch
  964 F.2d 670· 7th Cir.· 1992-05-20 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the denial of the habeas petition, holding that the petitioner knowingly and intelligently waived her right to conflict-free counsel and that the trial court's actions did not violate her due process rights.
• Hill v. State
  596 So. 2d 1210· Fla. 1st DCA· 1992-04-08 ·cited 8×
  Samuel Hill, a 16-year-old juvenile convicted of cocaine sale and possession, appeals his sentencing as an adult. The court reverses and remands because the trial court failed to make written findings on the statutory criteria required for imposing adult sanctions on juveniles, a
• Stewart v. Peters
  958 F.2d 1379· 7th Cir.· 1992-02-27 ·cited 8×
  A guilty plea is voluntary and intelligent if the defendant understands the rights they are waiving and the consequences of the plea, even if the record lacks explicit admissions or detailed explanations of statutory elements.
• United States v. Benefield
  942 F.2d 60· 1st Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the admission of prior bad acts evidence and the defendant's pro se representation were proper, but the amended sentence increasing the term of imprisonment was illegal.
• United States v. Parra-Ibanez
  936 F.2d 588· 1st Cir.· 1991-06-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court's Rule 11 colloquy was insufficient for failing to inquire further into the effects of the defendant's medications on his ability to enter a knowing and voluntary plea.
• United States v. Bradshaw
  935 F.2d 295· D.C. Cir.· 1991-06-07 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred by failing to determine if the defendant's waiver of Miranda rights was knowing and intelligent, and remanded for this determination.
• United States v. Zenon Hernandez
  913 F.2d 1506· 10th Cir.· 1990-09-10 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the statute's confidentiality provision was clear and did not permit the exception created by the majority.
• United States v. Fisher
  912 F.2d 728· 4th Cir.· 1990-08-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant's oral consent given in chambers, followed by silence in open court, can constitute a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to a twelve-member jury under Rule 23(b).
• United States v. Smith
  907 F.2d 42· 6th Cir.· 1990-07-03 ·cited 8×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  A defendant who knowingly and intelligently waives the right to counsel, including standby counsel, also relinquishes the right to access to a law library.
• United States v. Washington
  886 F.2d 154· 8th Cir.· 1989-09-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the defendant failed to establish a prima facie case of jury discrimination and that his prior conviction was validly entered, thus affirming his conviction and sentence.
• Berry v. A.L. Lockhart
  873 F.2d 1168· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-09 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the district court's grant of habeas relief, holding that the defendant did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel.
• Buddy L. Taylor v. State
  534 So. 2d 1181· Fla. 4th DCA· 1988-11-02 ·cited 8×
  Buddy L. Taylor, a juvenile tried as an adult for burglary, was convicted and sentenced to 30 months imprisonment as a youthful offender. The court reversed and remanded the sentence because the trial court failed to comply with Florida Statutes § 39.111(7)(c) and (d) by not ente
• United States v. Rossillo
  853 F.2d 1062· 2d Cir.· 1988-08-11 ·cited 8×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that the defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea was properly denied because the plea was entered voluntarily and knowingly, despite claims of a heart condition affecting his understanding.
• Stano v. Dugger
  846 F.2d 1286· 11th Cir.· 1988-05-18 ·cited 8×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The court held that the petitioner's claim that he proceeded pro se without a knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel is not frivolous and warrants further review.
• McFADDEN v. D.A. Garraghty
  820 F.2d 654· 4th Cir.· 1987-06-08 ·cited 8×
  The court held that breaks in custody, changes in interrogation location and interrogators, and proper Miranda warnings vitiated an initial violation of the Edwards rule, and that subsequent confessions were voluntary.
• Bridges v. United States
  794 F.2d 1189· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that a defendant experienced in criminal proceedings who knowingly chooses to retain counsel with a known conflict of interest, and assures the court he is satisfied with that counsel, waives his right to conflict-free representation.
• Miller v. State
  485 So. 2d 1346· Fla. 5th DCA· 1986-03-27 ·cited 8×
  Miller was convicted of aggravated battery after the trial court allowed him to represent himself without conducting a proper Faretta inquiry to ensure his waiver of counsel was knowing and intelligent. The appellate court reversed and remanded for a new trial, holding that the t
• Otis v. State
  444 So. 2d 1177· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-02-15 ·cited 8×
  Florida appellate court reversed grand theft conviction because trial court failed to ensure defendant's oral waiver of jury trial was knowing and intelligent, lacking both written documentation and judicial inquiry into understanding.
• Layton v. State
  435 So. 2d 883· Fla. 3d DCA· 1983-07-12 ·cited 8×
  A prosecutor's comment during closing argument that is susceptible to interpretation as referring to a defendant's failure to testify constitutes reversible error if preserved by objection.
• Clark v. Solem
  693 F.2d 59· 8th Cir.· 1982-11-23 ·cited 8×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that the appellant's guilty plea was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, and that his sentence did not violate equal protection principles.
• Sinclair v. State OF La.
  679 F.2d 513· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-02 ·cited 8×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that a federal habeas petition can be dismissed as successive and an abuse of the writ if it raises the same claims previously decided on the merits and fails to allege new grounds for relief.
• Williford v. Estelle
  672 F.2d 552· 5th Cir.· 1982-04-09 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the petitioner knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, and the Louisiana conviction was not void.
• United States v. Johnson
  659 F.2d 415· 4th Cir.· 1981-09-11 ·cited 8×
  A defendant must be adequately informed of their right to court-appointed counsel at government expense, even when ordered to reimburse the court for prior appointed counsel, and a waiver is invalid if not knowing and intelligent.
• VIA v. Superintendent, Powhatan Corr. Ctr.
  643 F.2d 167· 4th Cir.· 1981-02-26 ·cited 8×
  A guilty plea is involuntary and unintelligent if counsel's ineffective assistance, stemming from lack of preparation, induced the plea.
• Fick v. State
  388 So. 2d 1352· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-10-15 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the conviction and sentence, holding that a trial court lacks jurisdiction to consider a motion to withdraw a guilty plea after an appeal has been commenced.
• United States v. Bird
  621 F.2d 989· 9th Cir.· 1980-06-19 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the appellant did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel, requiring reversal of his convictions.
• United States v. Nooner
  565 F.2d 633· 10th Cir.· 1977-06-13 ·cited 8×
  A voluntary guilty plea waives the right to appeal non-jurisdictional issues, including the denial of a motion to suppress evidence.
• Bryan v. State
  345 So. 2d 1095· Fla. 2d DCA· 1977-05-06 ·cited 8×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  Richard Henry Bryan sought to vacate his 1964 escape conviction on the ground that he was not represented by counsel and had not knowingly and intelligently waived counsel. The Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District, reversed the trial court's denial of the motion with
• Harris v. Riddle
  551 F.2d 936· 4th Cir.· 1977-03-14 ·cited 8×
  A suspect's waiver of Fifth Amendment rights is knowing and intelligent if made with an understanding of the right to remain silent and the right to counsel, regardless of any misapprehension of the law or facts.
• United States v. Nussen
  531 F.2d 15· 2d Cir.· 1976-01-30 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the government's use of a defendant's self-incriminating statements, obtained after a blanket promise of immunity from a government agent, violated the defendant's Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, even when used for rebuttal.
• United States v. Cooper
  499 F.2d 1060· D.C. Cir.· 1974-06-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the evidence obtained from Cooper's custodial interrogation was inadmissible because the government failed to meet its heavy burden of proving a knowing and intelligent waiver of his Miranda rights after he refused to sign a written waiver and indicated a desi
• Redus v. Swenson
  468 F.2d 606· 8th Cir.· 1972-10-04 ·cited 8×
  A guilty plea is valid if entered understandingly and voluntarily with competent counsel, even if influenced by a prior coerced confession.
• United States v. Ready
  460 F.2d 1238· 4th Cir.· 1972-05-15 ·cited 8×
  A defendant's guilty plea is valid even if the court does not explicitly inform them of the right to confront accusers, as this right is implicitly waived by pleading guilty.
• Oaks v. Louie L. Wainwright
  445 F.2d 1062· 5th Cir.· 1971-06-25 ·cited 8×
  A guilty plea is valid even if equivocal, provided it is knowingly and voluntarily entered and supported by independent corroborating evidence of guilt.
• United States v. Denvil Ronald Daniel
  441 F.2d 374· 5th Cir.· 1971-04-06 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the government met its burden of showing the appellant knowingly and intelligently waived his privilege against self-incrimination and right to counsel.