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

• Flowers v. State
  976 So. 2d 665· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-03-13 ·cited 24×
  Timothy Flowers challenged his conviction for failing to register as a sex offender, alleging the trial court failed to conduct an adequate Faretta inquiry before permitting self-representation. The court agreed and reversed, finding the trial court did not sufficiently explore F
• Caputo v. Henderson
  541 F.2d 979· 2d Cir.· 1976-09-03 ·cited 24×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  A guilty plea is constitutionally valid if the defendant was aware of the actual sentencing possibilities, and if not, whether accurate information would have made a difference in the decision to plead.
• United States v. Davis
  516 F.2d 574· 7th Cir.· 1975-05-15 ·cited 24×
  A guilty plea can be accepted under Rule 11 even if the defendant maintains innocence, provided there is a strong factual basis for the plea and the defendant understands the charge and consequences.
• United States v. Tabory
  462 F.2d 352· 4th Cir.· 1972-06-21 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the defendant's guilty plea was voluntary and intelligent, and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying his motion to withdraw the plea.
• State v. Graham
  240 So. 2d 486· Fla. 2d DCA· 1970-10-30 ·cited 24×
  Florida appeals the trial court's suppression of defendant Graham's confession. The appellate court holds that the state must prove by clear and convincing evidence that Miranda warnings were given, were adequate, and that any waiver was knowing and intelligent, and reverses for
• Stephen v. United States
  426 F.2d 257· 5th Cir.· 1970-05-11 ·cited 24×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The court held that a defendant's guilty plea is invalid if the trial court erroneously advises them of the maximum penalty, requiring an evidentiary hearing to determine if the defendant was misled.
• Kirshberger v. United States
  392 F.2d 782· 5th Cir.· 1968-04-08 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appellants' motion to withdraw their guilty pleas.
• Spanbauer v. Burke
  374 F.2d 67· 7th Cir.· 1966-12-28 ·cited 24×·via Intelligent And Understanding Waiver
  The dissenting judge believes the petitioner's waiver of counsel was made under circumstances that denied him due process, rendering the waiver invalid.
• Twining v. United States
  321 F.2d 432· 5th Cir.· 1963-08-05 ·cited 24×·via Intelligent And Understanding Waiver
  The court held that the defendant's contentions regarding the invalidity of his guilty plea and waiver of counsel were not supported by the record.
• Armour Bailey v. United States
  312 F.2d 679· 10th Cir.· 1963-01-24 ·cited 24×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the motion to vacate the judgment and sentence, as the petitioner's plea was voluntary and understanding, and sentencing procedures were substantially compliant.
• United States v. Morgan
  222 F.2d 673· 2d Cir.· 1955-05-19 ·cited 24×·via Intelligent Waiver Of Rights
  A conviction obtained without advising the defendant of his right to counsel and without an intelligent waiver thereof is void and requires relief, regardless of a showing of innocence or delay in seeking relief.
• Tyson L. Chaffin v. State
  121 So. 3d 608· Fla. 4th DCA· 2013-08-14 ·cited 23×
  Tyson Chaffin appeals his convictions for second-degree murder and tampering with evidence following the fatal shooting of his father. The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed the murder conviction and the denial of his suppression motion, but reversed the tampering convictio
• J.G. a child v. State
  883 So. 2d 915· Fla. 1st DCA· 2004-10-11 ·cited 23×
  A 13-year-old juvenile's sexual battery conviction was reversed because the trial court erred in finding that his Miranda waiver was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary, and that his confession was freely given. The confession was obtained through custodial interrogation without
• Hart v. Attorney Gen. OF THE State OF Fla.
  323 F.3d 884· 11th Cir.· 2003-03-05 ·cited 23×
  Robert Hart was convicted of two murders and armed robbery based primarily on a taped confession obtained after he signed a Miranda waiver form. The Eleventh Circuit granted habeas relief, holding that Hart's waiver was involuntary and not made with full awareness of his rights b
• Detric McCARTHY v. State
  731 So. 2d 778· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-04-14 ·cited 23×
  Detric McCarthy was convicted of robbery with a firearm after discharging his court-appointed counsel and representing himself pro se. On appeal, McCarthy challenged whether the trial court properly followed procedures for self-representation under Faretta v. California and wheth
• Strozier v. Lanson Newsome
  926 F.2d 1100· 11th Cir.· 1991-03-19 ·cited 23×
  The court held that the record, including witness testimony about pre-trial warnings, sufficiently established that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel, despite the lack of a formal, on-the-record waiver hearing.
• United States v. Fant
  890 F.2d 408· 11th Cir.· 1989-12-13 ·cited 23×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The court held that even without a formal waiver hearing, the record contained sufficient evidence to establish that the defendant's waiver of counsel and decision to proceed pro se was knowing and intelligent.
• Smith v. Zant
  887 F.2d 1407· 11th Cir.· 1989-09-29 ·cited 23×
• Sanchez v. United States
  782 F.2d 928· 11th Cir.· 1986-02-19 ·cited 23×
  A defendant may waive the right to a unanimous jury verdict in a federal criminal case under exceptional circumstances, provided the waiver is initiated by the defendant and is made knowingly and voluntarily with the court's and government's consent.
• United States v. Deal
  678 F.2d 1062· 11th Cir.· 1982-06-18 ·cited 23×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that the defendant's guilty plea was knowing and voluntary, despite allegations of misleading advice from FBI agents, because he was represented by counsel before pleading and affirmed his plea in court.
• Cooper v. Griffin
  455 F.2d 1142· 5th Cir.· 1972-02-07 ·cited 23×
  The court held that mentally retarded individuals, due to their limited capacity, cannot knowingly and intelligently waive their Miranda rights.
• Blair v. State
  667 So. 2d 834· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-01-10 ·cited 22×
  Lance Blair appeals his convictions for burglary, grand theft, dealing in stolen property, and conspiracy to commit burglary arising from a Palm Beach home burglary. The court affirmed convictions for burglary, dealing in stolen property, and conspiracy; reversed the grand theft
• State v. Freeman Edgar Crosby
  599 So. 2d 138· Fla. 5th DCA· 1992-04-24 ·cited 22×
  Florida appeals a trial court's suppression of the defendant's confession in a sexual battery and lewd/lascivious act case, arguing the defendant's statements were voluntary and admissible despite his claimed limited mental capacity. The appellate court reverses, holding that abs
• United States v. Frank
  956 F.2d 872· 9th Cir.· 1991-06-03 ·cited 22×
  A jury should be instructed on the consequences of a verdict of not guilty by reason of insanity when properly raised, unless the defendant requests otherwise.
• United States v. Ingram
  839 F.2d 1327· 8th Cir.· 1988-02-19 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the defendant's motion to suppress post-arrest statements, nor in denying his motion for a mistrial based on the prosecution's use of peremptory challenges.
• Joseph D. McMAHON P-7814 v. Fulcomer
  821 F.2d 934· 3d Cir.· 1987-06-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in dismissing the habeas petition as mixed, and that the petitioner did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel.
• Fields v. Wyrick
  706 F.2d 879· 8th Cir.· 1983-05-23 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioner validly waived his Sixth Amendment right to counsel for the post-polygraph interrogation, rendering his incriminating statement voluntary and admissible.
• Ardia v. McCREE
  689 F.2d 797· 8th Cir.· 1982-10-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioner's video-taped statement was admissible because he initiated further communication with the police after invoking his right to counsel and knowingly and intelligently waived that right.
• United States v. Goodheim
  651 F.2d 1294· 9th Cir.· 1981-07-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the Supreme Court's decision in Lewis v. United States, which allowed constitutionally infirm prior convictions to serve as predicate felonies, should not be applied retroactively in this circuit due to due process concerns regarding fair warning.
• Middlebrooks v. United States
  457 F.2d 657· 5th Cir.· 1972-03-27 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel and that collateral estoppel did not apply to his conviction.
• United States v. Jackson
  448 F.2d 539· 5th Cir.· 1971-09-08 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to ask a specific voir dire question regarding juror bias towards law enforcement officers and that the appellant's confessions were admissible despite his arrest by state authorities.
• United States v. MIX
  446 F.2d 615· 5th Cir.· 1971-08-12 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the statute was constitutional, the search was valid based on consent, the defendant's statements were admissible after Miranda warnings, and the IRS certificate was admissible as an official record.
• Nunez v. State
  227 So. 2d 324· Fla. 4th DCA· 1969-10-29 ·cited 22×
  An accused in custody, having initially invoked the right to counsel, may subsequently and voluntarily waive that right if the waiver is made knowingly and intelligently.
• Hardy Rosenthall v. Henderson
  389 F.2d 514· 6th Cir.· 1968-02-14 ·cited 22×
  The court affirmed the district judge's finding that the prisoner's Fourth Amendment rights were violated because his consent to the search was not knowingly and intelligently given.
• Hield v. State
  201 So. 2d 235· Fla. 4th DCA· 1967-07-24 ·cited 22×
  A voluntary plea of guilty entered on advice of counsel is conclusive as to the defendant's guilt, waives all non-jurisdictional defects in prior proceedings, and cannot be collaterally attacked based on previously illegally obtained confessions or other procedural defects.
• Tejeda v. United States Immigr. & Naturalization Serv.
  346 F.2d 389· 9th Cir.· 1965-05-19 ·cited 22×·via Intelligent Waiver Of Rights
  The court held that if the petitioner made a bona fide effort to reenter and was denied reentry due to misadvice from the American Consul, respondents should be precluded from denying reentry.
• Bowen v. State
  677 So. 2d 863· Fla. 2d DCA· 1996-05-29 ·cited 21×
  Jimmy Dell Bowen was convicted of second-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, and carrying a concealed weapon after being denied his request to represent himself. The court reverses because the trial court improperly denied Bowen's Sixth Amendment right to self-represent
• Bruni v. Lewis
  847 F.2d 561· 9th Cir.· 1988-05-24 ·cited 21×
  A defendant's statement, "Not without my attorney. Well, ask your questions, and I will answer those I see fit," constitutes an unequivocal selective waiver of the right to counsel, allowing subsequent interrogation on topics the defendant chooses to answer.
• Harding v. Lewis
  834 F.2d 853· 9th Cir.· 1987-12-21 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the defendant was competent to waive his right to counsel, that the waiver was made knowingly and intelligently, and that he was not prejudiced by his attorney's advice to self-represent.
• State v. The Honorable Virgil B. Conkling
  421 So. 2d 1108· Fla. 5th DCA· 1982-11-17 ·cited 21×·via Intelligent And Understanding Waiver
  A Florida juvenile challenged his prosecution in adult court for a felony offense, seeking transfer to juvenile court. The court held that prior uncounseled juvenile adjudications cannot be counted to establish jurisdiction in adult court, as doing so would violate the constituti
• The United States v. White
  451 F.2d 696· 5th Cir.· 1971-10-19 ·cited 21×
  The court held that there was no fatal variance between the indictment and the proof, that the statute applies to any false statement made in connection with a firearm acquisition regardless of who the actual purchaser is, and that the defendant validly waived his Miranda rights.
• McKENZIE v. State
  153 So. 3d 867· Fla.· 2014-04-17 ·cited 20×
  Norman Blake McKenzie appeals the summary denial of his Rule 3.851 postconviction motion challenging his death sentences for two first-degree murders. McKenzie, who represented himself during trial after a knowing and voluntary waiver of counsel, claims ineffective assistance of
• Trease v. State
  41 So. 3d 119· Fla.· 2010-06-24 ·cited 20×
  Robert Trease, a death-sentenced inmate, moved to waive postconviction counsel and proceedings. The trial court granted his motion after conducting a Durocher hearing finding him competent and his waiver knowing, intelligent, and voluntary. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, rej
• Ephone Kelly v. State
  797 So. 2d 1278· Fla. 4th DCA· 2001-10-31 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to sua sponte order a competency hearing for the defendant, given the circumstances.
• Stumes v. Solem
  671 F.2d 1150· 8th Cir.· 1982-03-01 ·cited 20×
  The dissenting judge holds that the defendant's statements were voluntary and admissible, distinguishing the case from Edwards v. Arizona.
• United States v. Terence Cecil Stacey
  571 F.2d 440· 8th Cir.· 1978-03-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the defendant's confession was admissible, the pre-indictment delay was not prejudicial, and the indictment was not the result of prosecutorial vindictiveness.
• Gov't OF the Canal Zone v. Godofredo Gomez
  566 F.2d 1289· 5th Cir.· 1978-02-06 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the government failed to meet its heavy burden to demonstrate that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel after requesting an attorney, thus the confession was inadmissible.
• Singleton v. State
  344 So. 2d 911· Fla. 3d DCA· 1977-04-05 ·cited 20×
  Joann Singleton was convicted of manslaughter for the death of her husband. The Florida District Court of Appeal reversed her conviction because the trial court erroneously denied her motion to suppress statements made to police, which were obtained in violation of her Fifth and
• United States v. Simmons
  497 F.2d 177· 5th Cir.· 1974-07-12 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the appellant's motion to withdraw his guilty plea.
• Moore v. Wolff
  495 F.2d 35· 8th Cir.· 1974-04-23 ·cited 20×
  A defendant can voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waive their right to have counsel present at an interrogation even after counsel has been appointed.