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

• Ivory Ferrell v. Music
  484 So. 2d 595· Fla. 4th DCA· 1985-11-06 ·cited 14×
  A prisoner petitioned for a writ of habeas corpus to belatedly appeal the denial of his post-conviction relief motion, claiming he did not receive the trial court's order for seven months due to a mailing delay. The Florida District Court of Appeal granted the petition, finding t
• Pitts v. United States
  763 F.2d 197· 6th Cir.· 1985-05-30 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a defendant's claim of attorney misadvice regarding maximum sentence exposure, and the trial court's own misstatement of maximum sentence exposure, warrant an evidentiary hearing to determine if the guilty plea was voluntary and intelligent.
• Zellers v. Duckworth
  763 F.2d 250· 7th Cir.· 1985-05-17 ·cited 14×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that the State is estopped from contesting Zellers' assertion of cause for his procedural default due to systemic failures in providing due process rights. The court also found sufficient prejudice to justify a hearing.
• Kennedy v. Maggio
  725 F.2d 269· 5th Cir.· 1984-02-21 ·cited 14×
  A guilty plea induced by counsel's erroneous advice that the death penalty was applicable, when it was not, renders the plea involuntary and violates the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Clements
  713 F.2d 1030· 4th Cir.· 1983-07-28 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the introduction of evidence was harmless error and that knowledge of an indictment is not necessary for a knowing and intentional waiver of the right to counsel.
• United States v. Constanza D'Allerman
  712 F.2d 100· 5th Cir.· 1983-07-18 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant voluntarily consented to the X-ray examination, making the evidence of cocaine admissible.
• United States v. Garvin Dale White
  706 F.2d 506· 5th Cir.· 1983-05-19 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant's waiver of his right to conflict-free counsel was invalid because the trial court failed to adequately inform him of the specific dangers and potential prejudice arising from his attorneys' conflict of interest.
• United States v. Martin
  704 F.2d 267· 6th Cir.· 1983-04-04 ·cited 14×
  A defendant's jury trial waiver is valid if it is in writing, consented to by the government, approved by the court, and made voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently, even without a specific on-the-record colloquy detailing all rights.
• Piankhy v. Cuyler
  703 F.2d 728· 3d Cir.· 1983-03-29 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial court did not sufficiently inform the defendant of his right to counsel and the dangers of self-representation, thus the waiver was not knowing and intelligent.
• Moya v. W.J. Estelle, Jr.
  696 F.2d 329· 5th Cir.· 1983-01-24 ·cited 14×
  A federal court need not hold an evidentiary hearing on a habeas corpus petition if the petitioner's allegations are contradicted by the existing record, including prior sworn testimony and affidavits.
• Cmty. Health Servs. OF Crawford Cnty., Inc. v. Califano
  698 F.2d 615· 3d Cir.· 1983-01-19 ·cited 14×·via Intelligent Waiver
  The government cannot be estopped from seeking reimbursement for an overpayment when the recipient never had a substantive entitlement to the funds.
• Johnson v. State
  411 So. 2d 1023· Fla. 2d DCA· 1982-03-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the appellant did not validly waive his right to a jury trial because the waiver was not knowing, voluntary, and intelligent, as required by law.
• United States v. Laura
  667 F.2d 365· 3d Cir.· 1981-12-15 ·cited 14×
  The court held that an actual conflict of interest from joint representation did not adversely affect the appellant's legal representation, and that she made a knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver of her right to separate counsel. Furthermore, the court found that the trial
• Brown v. Jernigan
  622 F.2d 914· 5th Cir.· 1980-08-01 ·cited 14×·via Knowing And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the habeas petition, as the petitioner's guilty plea was voluntary and knowing, and other claims lacked merit.
• Scott v. Louie L. Wainwright
  617 F.2d 99· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-14 ·cited 14×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The Fifth Circuit held that the Florida court erroneously denied the petitioner his constitutional right to self-representation, as the circuit recognized this right prior to the Supreme Court's decision in Faretta v. California.
• Gray v. Estelle
  616 F.2d 801· 5th Cir.· 1980-05-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to conflict-free counsel because the state failed to prove he understood the dangers of the conflict or his right to obtain other counsel.
• United States v. DeFALCO
  644 F.2d 132· 3d Cir.· 1979-12-28 ·cited 14×
  The plurality opinion presumes an inherent conflict of interest for an indicted attorney, potentially leading to ineffective assistance of counsel claims.
• United States v. Palmer
  604 F.2d 64· 10th Cir.· 1979-08-21 ·cited 14×
  The government failed to demonstrate that the minor defendant possessed the capacity to knowingly and intelligently waive his Fifth Amendment rights.
• United States v. Crowhurst
  596 F.2d 389· 9th Cir.· 1979-05-07 ·cited 14×
  The court held that a defendant's waiver of counsel is invalid if the court fails to inform the defendant of the nature of the charges and the potential penalties.
• Fillippini v. Ristaino
  585 F.2d 1163· 1st Cir.· 1978-11-07 ·cited 14×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The court held that the appellant competently and intelligently waived his right to counsel and that the in-court identification was not constitutionally infirm.
• Bedie Thundershield v. Solem
  565 F.2d 1018· 8th Cir.· 1977-11-14 ·cited 14×
  A guilty plea is constitutionally valid even if the defendant maintains their innocence, provided the plea is voluntary, intelligent, and supported by a factual basis, and counsel was effective.
• Battle v. State
  338 So. 2d 1107· Fla. 3d DCA· 1976-10-26 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the defendant validly waived his Miranda rights and that his sentence was not improper.
• United States v. Olof
  527 F.2d 752· 9th Cir.· 1975-12-31 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the statement taken from the appellant should have been suppressed because his right to cut off questioning was not scrupulously honored after he invoked his Miranda rights.
• Burns v. State
  300 So. 2d 317· Fla. 2d DCA· 1974-09-20 ·cited 14×
  Roger Ray Burns pleaded guilty to grand larceny after being charged with larceny of a calf under a repealed statute. The court affirmed his conviction while treating the guilty plea as an amendment of the charging document, despite the original charge carrying a mandatory two-yea
• Thunder v. United States
  477 F.2d 1326· 8th Cir.· 1973-05-21 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the trial judge substantially complied with Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and thus the appellant's motion to vacate his sentence was properly denied.
• United States v. Stamp
  458 F.2d 759· D.C. Cir.· 1971-12-20 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the Miranda warnings were properly given and understood by the defendants, fulfilling the objectives of the Miranda decision.
• Smith v. Lamont Smith
  433 F.2d 582· 5th Cir.· 1970-10-30 ·cited 14×
  A valid guilty plea waives all non-jurisdictional defects in prior proceedings, including claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or lack of counsel at pre-trial identification procedures.
• United States ex rel. Nelson Miner v. Erickson
  428 F.2d 623· 8th Cir.· 1970-06-05 ·cited 14×
  The court held that the petitioner did not make an intelligent and understanding waiver of his right to counsel due to his limited capacity and lack of comprehension of the charges and defenses.
• Miles v. United States
  385 F.2d 541· 10th Cir.· 1967-11-29 ·cited 14×·via Intelligent And Understanding Waiver
  A defendant's disappointment with the sentence imposed does not constitute manifest injustice, and therefore does not warrant withdrawal of a guilty plea after sentencing.
• Brisbon v. State
  201 So. 2d 832· Fla. 3d DCA· 1967-08-15 ·cited 14×
  Wilson Brisbon appeals his conviction for breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor and petit larceny, challenging whether he validly waived his right to counsel. The court affirms, holding that his simple "Yes" response to whether he would answer questions withou
• McCRAY v. State
  181 So. 2d 729· Fla. 1st DCA· 1966-01-06 ·cited 14×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  Leroy McCray appealed a denial of his post-conviction motion challenging his 1950 guilty plea conviction on the ground that counsel was appointed only on the day of trial, allegedly depriving him of adequate time to prepare. The court affirmed, holding that where counsel is appoi
• O'Keith v. Johnston
  129 F.2d 889· 9th Cir.· 1942-08-20 ·cited 14×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The court held that a finding of intelligent waiver of counsel is a factual determination binding on appeal, and that habeas corpus proceedings require a summary hearing by the judge, not a jury trial.
• Neal v. State
  142 So. 3d 883· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-05-20 ·cited 13×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  This is an Anders appeal from a conviction and HFO sentence following a mid-trial nolo contendere plea. While the court affirmed the conviction and sentence after independent review, it issued a substantial opinion criticizing appointed counsel's deficient Anders brief for failin
• Neal v. State
  132 So. 3d 949· Fla. 1st DCA· 2014-02-21 ·cited 13×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  The court held that the trial court erred by failing to apply the correct legal standard when evaluating the defendant's request to proceed without counsel.
• State v. Hunt
  14 So. 3d 1035· Fla. 2d DCA· 2009-05-22 ·cited 13×
  Florida appeals a trial court's order suppressing statements made by Arthur Lee Hunt after he reinitiated dialogue with detectives following an invocation of his Miranda rights. The appellate court reverses, holding that when a suspect initiates further communications after invok
• Case v. State
  865 So. 2d 557· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-12-29 ·cited 13×
  Van Allen was arrested for DWI and pleaded guilty without counsel after waiving his right to counsel. He later sought to withdraw his plea, claiming it was involuntary because he was not informed of license suspension and the trial court failed to conduct a Faretta inquiry into t
• Kearse v. State
  858 So. 2d 348· Fla. 1st DCA· 2003-10-30 ·cited 13×
  James Kearse sought the right to represent himself at a pre-trial suppression hearing, but the trial court denied his request without conducting the required Faretta hearing. The appellate court held that a defendant has an affirmative constitutional right to self-representation
• Beaton v. State
  709 So. 2d 172· Fla. 4th DCA· 1998-04-01 ·cited 13×·via Knowing And Intelligent Waiver Of Counsel
  Wayne Beaton appeals his conviction for burglary while armed and wearing a mask, grand theft, and dealing in stolen property. The court reverses on two grounds: the trial court abused its discretion by denying Beaton's request to represent himself without making a proper Faretta
• United States v. FOX
  941 F.2d 480· 7th Cir.· 1991-08-15 ·cited 13×
  The court held that the district court's failure to explicitly inform the defendant of the possibility of restitution was harmless error, and that his sentence did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause.
• United States v. Gaddy
  894 F.2d 1307· 11th Cir.· 1990-02-20 ·cited 13×
  The court held that Danner's statements were admissible because his aunt, acting as a private citizen, initiated contact, and his waiver of rights was knowing and intelligent. Gaddy's mistrial motion was denied as any error was harmless.
• United States v. Cole
  813 F.2d 43· 3d Cir.· 1987-03-06 ·cited 13×
  A district court must make further inquiry into a defendant's competence to enter a guilty plea when informed of recent drug use, and failure to do so violates Rule 11.
• United States v. Levine
  794 F.2d 1203· 7th Cir.· 1986-06-30 ·cited 13×
  A defendant can waive their right to effective assistance of counsel, even when facing a conflict of interest, provided the waiver is knowing, voluntary, and intelligent.
• United States v. French
  719 F.2d 387· 11th Cir.· 1983-11-10 ·cited 13×
  The court held that a defendant's ignorance of a specific plea bargaining rule not applicable to his case does not render his guilty plea involuntary or constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
• Ira Nash, Jr. v. Estelle
  560 F.2d 652· 5th Cir.· 1977-10-05 ·cited 13×
• Molignaro v. Lamont Smith
  408 F.2d 795· 5th Cir.· 1969-03-18 ·cited 13×
  A guilty plea waiver of the right to counsel is invalid if the accused is not informed of the maximum possible sentence, especially when the accused lacks education and prior criminal experience.
• Edenfield v. State
  45 So. 3d 26· Fla. 1st DCA· 2010-08-10 ·cited 12×
  Eric Edenfield challenged his waiver of the right to counsel in a DUI case, arguing the trial court failed to conduct a sufficiently thorough Faretta inquiry. The Florida District Court of Appeal held that while a Faretta inquiry must ensure a knowing and intelligent waiver, ther
• Bean v. State
  752 So. 2d 644· Fla. 5th DCA· 2000-01-07 ·cited 12×
  Kevin Bean appeals the denial of his motion to suppress a custodial confession to lewd and lascivious assault charges. The court reversed, holding that the investigator violated Bean's rights under Florida law by failing to properly answer his clear questions about his right to c
• Ferrer v. Manning
  682 So. 2d 659· Fla. 3d DCA· 1996-11-06 ·cited 12×
  Ferrer petitions for habeas corpus relief, claiming his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise that the trial judge's absence during jury testimony readback was fundamental error. The court grants the petition, finding counsel's omission fell outside the range of
• Pedro v. United States
  79 F.3d 1065· 11th Cir.· 1996-04-09 ·cited 12×
  The court should reverse the grant of summary judgment in favor of the government and remand for factual determination of whether a prosecutorial promise of non-deportation was made as part of the plea agreement. If such a promise was made and relied upon, its breach constitutes
• Hicks v. State
  622 So. 2d 14· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-06-25 ·cited 12×
  Marcos Hicks was convicted of kidnapping, robbery, and sexual battery with a deadly weapon. The Fifth District Court of Appeal reversed and remanded because the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the necessarily included lesser offense of sexual battery by thre