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

• Arroyo v. State
  673 So. 2d 919· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-05-15 ·cited 6×
  David Arroyo, who pleaded guilty as a 15-year-old to second-degree murder and received a 30-year sentence, appealed the summary denial of his Rule 3.850 postconviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and procedural violations. The appellate court affirmed the de
• Hannah v. State
  644 So. 2d 141· Fla. 2d DCA· 1994-10-21 ·cited 6×
  Christopher Hannah appeals his sentencing as an adult in juvenile court, arguing the trial court failed to properly consider statutory criteria and used an outdated predisposition report. The appellate court reverses and remands for resentencing, requiring strict compliance with
• Hadden v. State
  633 So. 2d 486· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-03-01 ·cited 6×
  Edward Carol Hadden was convicted of shooting into an occupied vehicle while representing himself at trial. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed his conviction because the trial court failed to conduct a thorough inquiry to establish that his waiver of the right to couns
• Johnson v. State
  629 So. 2d 1050· Fla. 2d DCA· 1993-12-29 ·cited 6×·via Intelligent And Understanding Waiver
  Johnson appealed his convictions for burglary, grand theft, and criminal mischief, arguing that the trial court failed to adequately inquire into his reasons for discharging his public defender and whether his waiver of counsel was knowing and voluntary. The appellate court agree
• Singleton v. A.L. Lockhart
  962 F.2d 1315· 8th Cir.· 1992-05-01 ·cited 6×
  A defendant's knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to present mitigating evidence at the penalty phase of a capital trial is valid and forecloses challenges to the death sentence based on the failure to present such evidence.
• United States v. Eugenio Betancourt-Arretuche
  933 F.2d 89· 1st Cir.· 1991-05-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's request to represent himself was untimely because it was made after the jury had been empaneled and sworn, and thus affirmed the denial of the motion. The court also found sufficient evidence to sustain the conviction.
• Panuccio v. Kelly
  927 F.2d 106· 2d Cir.· 1991-03-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a defendant's Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel was not violated when counsel advised a guilty plea without fully disclosing a potential intoxication defense, if that defense had little chance of success and the potential sentence reduct
• Valencia v. United States
  923 F.2d 917· 1st Cir.· 1991-01-23 ·cited 6×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  A guilty plea is not knowing and intelligent if the defendant is not informed of all essential elements of the charged offense, particularly when the court and prosecution also appear to misunderstand the jurisdictional requirements.
• Bumgarner v. A.L. Lockhart
  920 F.2d 510· 8th Cir.· 1990-12-03 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the confinement prior to trial did not interfere with the defendant's ability to prepare his defense or obtain counsel, and that his waiver of counsel was knowing and intelligent.
• Derrick v. R.S. Peterson
  924 F.2d 813· 9th Cir.· 1990-08-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Derrick's confession was voluntary under the Fourteenth Amendment and his Miranda waiver was knowing and intelligent, affirming the denial of his habeas corpus petition.
• United States v. Edison Purnett
  910 F.2d 51· 2d Cir.· 1990-07-30 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred in its determination of the district court's competency ruling, arguing it was not constitutionally required and penalized the government.
• United States v. Polk
  908 F.2d 212· 7th Cir.· 1990-07-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's 1971 guilty pleas were constitutionally valid for sentence enhancement purposes, despite the absence of a full transcript, because the record indicated he was advised of his rights and represented by counsel, and Illinois law presumes regularit
• Stano v. Dugger
  889 F.2d 962· 11th Cir.· 1989-11-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court erred in accepting the defendant's guilty plea, as it violated his Sixth Amendment right to counsel, either by failing to ensure a knowing waiver of counsel when he effectively proceeded pro se, or by accepting the plea when counsel's assistanc
• Tucker v. State
  547 So. 2d 270· Fla. 4th DCA· 1989-08-02 ·cited 6×
  Ronald Tucker appealed his conviction, challenging whether he validly waived his right to a jury trial through oral waiver with counsel present. The Fourth District affirmed the conviction but certified to the Florida Supreme Court the important question of whether a represented
• Blackmon v. Armontrout
  875 F.2d 164· 8th Cir.· 1989-05-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court's refusal to allow the defendant to represent himself was proper, and the defendant was not prejudiced by his appellate counsel's failure to argue for a competency hearing.
• United States v. Flewitt
  874 F.2d 669· 9th Cir.· 1989-05-10 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in revoking the defendants' pro se status because their assertion of the right was equivocal and used as a tactic to delay the trial.
• Shedelbower v. Estelle
  859 F.2d 727· 9th Cir.· 1988-10-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that Shedelbower's confession was not obtained in violation of his constitutional rights, as he voluntarily initiated further communication after invoking his right to counsel.
• Carter v. State
  512 So. 2d 284· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-09-08 ·cited 6×
  A defendant's waiver of the right to have the trial judge present during jury selection is invalid if the record does not establish that the waiver was knowingly and intelligently made by the defendant.
• Landry v. Judge J. Robert Hoepfner and William Guste, Jr.
  818 F.2d 1169· 5th Cir.· 1987-06-03 ·cited 6×
  The Sixth Amendment does not require a jury trial for Driving While Intoxicated (DWI) offenses if the maximum possible punishment does not exceed that for petty offenses.
• United States v. Short
  790 F.2d 464· 6th Cir.· 1986-05-05 ·cited 6×
  The court would remand for further proceedings to determine the admissibility of the defendant's statements, finding the trial court did not have an adequate opportunity to rule on the issues.
• Horace v. Louie L. Wainwright
  781 F.2d 1558· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-14 ·cited 6×
• Martinez v. State
  475 So. 2d 1292· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-09-17 ·cited 6×·via Intelligent Waiver Of Rights
  Mario Martinez, a Cuban refugee who entered the U.S. through the Mariel boat-lift, appeals the summary denial of his post-conviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to advise him of potential deportation consequences before he entered a guilty plea t
• Hezekiah Pittman, Jr. v. Black
  764 F.2d 545· 8th Cir.· 1985-06-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant's statements to police were admissible because he initiated further communication after invoking his right to counsel, and he made a knowing and intelligent waiver of his rights.
• Powell v. Wyrick
  744 F.2d 632· 8th Cir.· 1984-09-26 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the petitioner knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, and there was no constitutional infirmity in his conviction.
• United States v. Gale Rene Hobson
  686 F.2d 628· 8th Cir.· 1982-08-18 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a guilty plea waives challenges to the indictment under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act and that a defendant need not admit participation in every overt act of a conspiracy to be convicted.
• Carter v. Garrison
  656 F.2d 68· 4th Cir.· 1981-08-06 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant made an effective waiver of his constitutional rights, rendering his inculpatory statements admissible.
• United States v. McFADDEN
  630 F.2d 963· 3d Cir.· 1980-09-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial judge did not commit reversible error by proceeding to trial with the defendant representing himself, with standby counsel, after the defendant discharged his second appointed attorney and insisted on self-representation.
• United States v. Lujan-Castro
  602 F.2d 877· 9th Cir.· 1979-07-24 ·cited 6×
  A waiver of the right to have the government retain deportable alien witnesses is effective if knowingly and intelligently made, even without the presence of a judge or counsel.
• In re Petition for Naturalization of Antonio Torres. Antonio Torres v. Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  602 F.2d 190· 7th Cir.· 1979-07-17 ·cited 6×
  The court held that an alien's request for military service exemption under a treaty, followed by his relief from service, constituted a knowing and intelligent waiver of his right to naturalization, even if his classification status was temporarily unclear.
• Ervin G. Taylor v. Hopper
  596 F.2d 1284· 5th Cir.· 1979-06-15 ·cited 6×
  The dissenting judge believes the record does not show the petitioner intelligently waived his Sixth Amendment right to counsel.
• Breedlove v. State
  364 So. 2d 495· Fla. 4th DCA· 1978-10-25 ·cited 6×
  Dora Mae Breedlove was convicted of assault and battery after being tried for second degree murder. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed because the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress statements made during police interrogation that violated Miranda righ
• United States v. McCASKILL
  585 F.2d 189· 6th Cir.· 1978-10-19 ·cited 6×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The court held that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel and was aware of the dangers of self-representation, and that the denial of a continuance was not an abuse of discretion.
• United States v. Danley
  564 F.2d 813· 8th Cir.· 1977-11-09 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the appellant's confession was voluntarily given after valid Miranda warnings and waiver of rights, and was therefore admissible.
• United States v. Sangvian Ford
  563 F.2d 1366· 9th Cir.· 1977-11-04 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant's intermittent silences during questioning did not revoke her prior waiver of her Miranda rights.
• Schriever v. United States
  553 F.2d 1152· 8th Cir.· 1977-04-18 ·cited 6×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that a Rule 11 violation does not necessitate vacating a conviction if the defendant was aware of the maximum penalty at the time of the plea.
• Russell v. Parratt
  543 F.2d 1214· 8th Cir.· 1976-10-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the prosecutor's discretion to charge a minor as an adult does not violate due process and that the defendant's confessions were voluntary and intelligently made.
• Russell v. State OF Mo.
  511 F.2d 861· 8th Cir.· 1975-03-07 ·cited 6×
  A guilty plea breaks the chain of prior constitutional deprivations, and a claim of counsel denial at arrest is insufficient to challenge a subsequent voluntary guilty plea unless it shows the plea itself was involuntary due to ineffective counsel.
• United States ex rel. Lonnie Davis v. Johnson
  495 F.2d 335· 3d Cir.· 1974-03-20 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the defendant was not denied effective assistance of counsel when entering his guilty plea, and therefore the plea was voluntary.
• Love v. State
  270 So. 2d 408· Fla. 4th DCA· 1972-12-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the trial court's inquiry into the defendant's waiver of counsel was insufficient to establish a knowing and intelligent waiver.
• Jones v. Cupp
  452 F.2d 1091· 9th Cir.· 1971-12-29 ·cited 6×
  The court held that a guilty plea is valid even if induced by a prior coerced confession, provided the plea itself was voluntary and intelligently entered with competent counsel. It also held that the prospective application of a reduced criminal penalty does not violate equal pr
• Courtney v. Sarver
  440 F.2d 1197· 8th Cir.· 1971-04-12 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the record was inadequate to review the petitioner's claims regarding denial of appeal and fair trial, remanding for further findings.
• Schofield v. United States
  441 F.2d 1219· 7th Cir.· 1971-03-10 ·cited 6×
  A guilty plea is not rendered involuntary or unintelligent by a misapprehension of the maximum possible sentence if the actual sentence imposed is not greater than the correct maximum and the plea was otherwise voluntary and intelligent.
• Benn v. Eyman
  436 F.2d 1074· 9th Cir.· 1971-01-19 ·cited 6×
• Schram v. Hoyt C. Cupp
  436 F.2d 692· 9th Cir.· 1970-11-25 ·cited 6×·via Intelligent Waiver
  The dissenting judge believes the majority erred by not granting a hearing to assess the credibility of the petitioner's assertion of non-knowing waiver of counsel.
• United States v. Obie Diah Strother
  434 F.2d 1292· 5th Cir.· 1970-11-16 ·cited 6×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that the defendant was entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his claims that his guilty pleas were not knowing and intelligent.
• State v. Levine
  237 So. 2d 193· Fla. 3d DCA· 1970-06-16 ·cited 6×·via Intelligent Waiver
  The State of Florida appealed the dismissal of bribery and conspiracy charges against attorneys Levine and Englander. The court reversed the dismissal, holding that both defendants had voluntarily and intelligently waived immunity before testifying to prosecutors and the grand ju
• United States ex rel. Ralph Madison H-5666 v. Rundle
  422 F.2d 49· 3d Cir.· 1970-02-27 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the relator's guilty plea was voluntary and that he was not denied his constitutional rights regarding the death penalty or the right to appeal.
• Streator v. United States
  367 F.2d 384· 5th Cir.· 1966-10-25 ·cited 6×
  A hearing is not mandatory on a motion to vacate a sentence if the motion, files, and records conclusively show the claim is without merit.
• United States ex rel. James Slebodnik v. Commonwealth OF Pa.
  343 F.2d 605· 3d Cir.· 1965-03-25 ·cited 6×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The court held that the petitioner was not adequately informed of his rights, including the right to counsel, and the nature and consequences of his guilty plea, thus his waiver was not intelligent and understanding.
• Alford v. Louie L. Wainwright
  156 So. 2d 1· Fla.· 1963-09-04 ·cited 6×·via Intelligent And Understanding Waiver
  John Alford petitioned for habeas corpus challenging his convictions on the grounds that he was denied the right to counsel. The Florida Supreme Court, guided by the landmark U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Carnley v. Cochran and Gideon v. Wainwright, vacated his convictions and