Voluntariness Of Guilty Plea

2,072 Florida cases classified under this topic, plus 1,103 listed through its narrower topics · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• McPHERSON v. State
  237 So. 2d 18· Fla. 1st DCA· 1970-06-25 ·cited 22×·via Knowing And Voluntary Plea
  James Edward McPherson appealed his conviction based on a nolo contendere plea, arguing the record failed to show his plea was knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily entered. The Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed the conviction but emphasized the importance of trial co
• Tyler v. Swenson
  427 F.2d 412· 8th Cir.· 1970-06-12 ·cited 22×
  A state court evidentiary hearing is not fair when the judge who presided over the original plea also acts as the trier of fact, relying on his own recollection of events that are disputed by the petitioner and cannot be cross-examined.
• Parrish v. Beto
  414 F.2d 770· 5th Cir.· 1969-08-04 ·cited 22×
• Maxwell v. Turner
  411 F.2d 805· 10th Cir.· 1969-05-26 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the federal district court did not err in denying a habeas corpus petition without an evidentiary hearing when the state court had provided an adequate hearing and the federal court properly reviewed the state proceedings.
• 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.
• Stephens v. United States
  376 F.2d 23· 10th Cir.· 1967-03-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a prior evidentiary hearing can cure a sentencing judge's failure to fully comply with Rule 11, Fed. R. Crim. P., and that a subsequent motion raising this issue is successive.
• Semet v. United States
  369 F.2d 90· 10th Cir.· 1966-11-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that a federal prisoner is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on a § 2255 petition if the record conclusively shows he is not entitled to relief.
• Mathis v. United States
  369 F.2d 43· 4th Cir.· 1966-10-25 ·cited 22×
  The writ of error coram nobis is available to challenge a conviction and sentence that a petitioner is to serve in the future, even in the absence of an allegation of present parole eligibility impairment.
• Trotter v. United States
  359 F.2d 419· 2d Cir.· 1966-04-21 ·cited 22×
• United States v. Diggs
  304 F.2d 929· 6th Cir.· 1962-06-29 ·cited 22×
  The court held that while the initial motion was properly denied, a new issue regarding the validity of the guilty plea under Rule 11 was raised, requiring a remand for a hearing.
• Verdon v. United States
  296 F.2d 549· 8th Cir.· 1961-11-13 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the petitioner's guilty plea was entered voluntarily and with understanding, despite the court not explicitly detailing the full range of punishment.
• Bartholomew v. United States
  286 F.2d 779· 8th Cir.· 1961-02-15 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the defendant's waiver of indictment, guilty plea, and sentence were valid, and no constitutional rights were violated.
• Coates v. United States
  273 F.2d 514· D.C. Cir.· 1959-12-10 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying the motion without a hearing, as the record did not conclusively show the prisoner was entitled to no relief.
• Floyd v. United States
  260 F.2d 910· 5th Cir.· 1958-11-05 ·cited 22×
  The court held that the files and records conclusively show the prisoner is entitled to no relief, affirming the denial of the motion to vacate sentence.
• Kinney v. United States
  177 F.2d 895· 10th Cir.· 1949-11-12 ·cited 22×
  A motion to vacate sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 cannot be used to retry the validity of a search and seizure after a guilty plea.
• Smith v. State
  840 So. 2d 404· Fla. 4th DCA· 2003-03-19 ·cited 21×·via Voluntary And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  A defendant is entitled as a matter of right to withdraw a guilty or no-contest plea entered prior to sentencing upon showing good cause, including a misapprehension of the plea terms, where the record contains no evidence contradicting the defendant's claim of misunderstanding a
• Shana Thornton v. State
  747 So. 2d 439· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-12-15 ·cited 21×
  A 17-year-old defendant pleaded guilty to armed carjacking, armed kidnapping, and armed robbery without being adequately advised of the three-year mandatory minimum sentence. The trial court denied her motion to withdraw the plea, but the appellate court reversed, finding the ple
• Jones v. State
  680 So. 2d 585· Fla. 4th DCA· 1996-09-11 ·cited 21×
  A defendant cannot collaterally attack the voluntariness of his plea based on alleged misstatements by defense counsel when the trial court correctly advised him of the maximum potential sentences at the plea hearing and he acknowledged understanding them without raising any ques
• Bermudez v. State
  603 So. 2d 657· Fla. 3d DCA· 1992-08-11 ·cited 21×
  The court held that a trial court's warning during a plea colloquy that a guilty plea could lead to deportation cures any prejudice from prior affirmative misadvice by counsel regarding immigration status.
• United States v. Wilson
  922 F.2d 1336· 7th Cir.· 1991-01-23 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support Wilson's conviction for unlawful firearm possession and that his sentence enhancement was proper, as he failed to demonstrate his prior guilty pleas were involuntary due to counsel's alleged threats.
• Gust v. State
  558 So. 2d 450· Fla. 1st DCA· 1990-02-28 ·cited 21×
  Stephen Gust appeals the denial of his Rule 3.850 post-conviction motion challenging the effectiveness of his counsel in advising him to plead nolo contendere to armed robbery. The court reverses and remands, finding that Gust's allegations that he used only a key-chain knife—whi
• Edmond Boris Shell v. State
  501 So. 2d 1334· Fla. 2d DCA· 1987-01-07 ·cited 21×·via Involuntary Plea
  The court held that the trial court erred in summarily denying Shell's motion to withdraw his plea without requiring the state to respond, as the record did not clearly refute Shell's allegations of an involuntary plea.
• United States v. Darling
  766 F.2d 1095· 7th Cir.· 1985-07-03 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court failed to comply with Rule 11 by not adequately informing the defendant of the nature of the conspiracy charge, and this error was not harmless. However, the failure to explain the mail fraud charges was harmless error.
• Dunn v. Wyrick
  679 F.2d 731· 8th Cir.· 1982-06-01 ·cited 21×
  The court held that the district court was justified in denying the habeas petition without an evidentiary hearing because the petitioner's allegations were contradicted by his sworn statements during the plea proceedings.
• Mahler v. United States
  333 F.2d 472· 10th Cir.· 1964-06-15 ·cited 21×
  A voluntarily entered guilty plea forecloses a defendant's right to object to the manner of arrest or evidence seizure.
• United States v. Hetherington
  279 F.2d 792· 7th Cir.· 1960-06-22 ·cited 21×
  A voluntary guilty plea, entered with understanding of the charges and consequences, waives all non-jurisdictional defects and bars withdrawal of the plea or vacation of the sentence. Sentences within statutory limits are not subject to appeal.
• Johnson v. State
  757 So. 2d 586· Fla. 2d DCA· 2000-05-10 ·cited 20×·via Involuntary Plea
  Jeffrey Johnson appeals the denial of his motion to withdraw a guilty plea, claiming his attorney gave him erroneous advice about the sentence he would receive. The appellate court reverses the summary denial and remands for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether counsel was
• Horton v. State
  646 So. 2d 253· Fla. 1st DCA· 1994-11-22 ·cited 20×·via Involuntary Plea
  David Horton appeals the denial of his motion to withdraw a no contest plea to two counts of uttering forged instruments. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial, holding that Horton's plea was entered voluntarily and that the trial court properly advised him of the
• Waters v. State
  612 So. 2d 685· Fla. 5th DCA· 1993-01-22 ·cited 20×·via Involuntary Plea
  The court held that a motion for post-conviction relief cannot be summarily denied without attaching the relevant record or holding an evidentiary hearing if the allegations are facially sufficient.
• United States v. Rhodes
  913 F.2d 839· 10th Cir.· 1990-09-06 ·cited 20×·via Knowing And Voluntary Plea
  The court held that a defendant's guilty plea was voluntary and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw the plea.
• Morgan Eugene Ayers v. State
  538 So. 2d 545· Fla. 1st DCA· 1989-02-17 ·cited 20×
  Florida appellate court affirmed conviction and sentence but reversed the imposition of court costs without notice, striking the $1,775 cost provision and remanding for reassessment with proper notice.
• Joseph v. Butler
  838 F.2d 786· 5th Cir.· 1988-03-03 ·cited 20×·via Voluntary And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that the record satisfied the requirements for accepting a guilty plea to a multiple offender charge to the extent they were applicable, and that the defendant failed to demonstrate ineffective assistance of counsel.
• United States v. Byrd
  804 F.2d 1204· 11th Cir.· 1986-11-24 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the trial court adequately ensured the defendant understood the charges and voluntarily pleaded guilty, despite initial ambiguities in the colloquy.
• United States v. Emiliano Valencia-Copete
  792 F.2d 4· 1st Cir.· 1986-05-29 ·cited 20×
  A defendant cannot withdraw a guilty plea simply because a judge rejects a prosecutor's sentencing recommendation, especially when the defendant was informed the recommendation was non-binding.
• Smith v. O.L. McCOTTER
  786 F.2d 697· 5th Cir.· 1986-04-07 ·cited 20×·via Knowing And Voluntary Plea
  A federal court reviewing a state conviction via habeas corpus is limited to federal constitutional claims, and a guilty plea waives most preceding claims, including alleged defects in the indictment or lack of personal service.
• Diaz v. T.C. Martin
  718 F.2d 1372· 5th Cir.· 1983-11-10 ·cited 20×
  A guilty plea, if voluntarily and knowingly entered, should not be set aside.
• United States v. Brown
  715 F.2d 387· 8th Cir.· 1983-08-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a defendant's failure to raise claims of ineffective assistance of counsel or involuntary guilty plea below, and the failure to rebut evidence presented at sentencing, precludes appellate review or constitutional claim.
• United States v. Usher
  703 F.2d 956· 6th Cir.· 1983-03-10 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a guilty plea entered into pursuant to a plea agreement was voluntary, and the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to withdraw the plea.
• United States v. Unger
  700 F.2d 445· 8th Cir.· 1983-02-18 ·cited 20×
  The court held that Crystal Unger did not knowingly waive her right to separate counsel, and the conflict of interest adversely affected her sentencing, thus vacating her sentence.
• Williams v. Estelle
  681 F.2d 946· 5th Cir.· 1982-07-02 ·cited 20×
  The court held that while the denial of in forma pauperis status and dismissal of a claim based on state procedural rules were proper, other claims regarding an involuntary guilty plea stated a valid basis for federal habeas corpus relief.
• United States ex rel. Steven Grundset v. Franzen
  675 F.2d 870· 7th Cir.· 1982-04-13 ·cited 20×·via Voluntary And Intelligent Guilty Plea
  The court held that the district court erred in granting summary judgment for the petitioner, as the state record, despite the lack of a verbatim transcript, sufficiently demonstrated the voluntary and knowing waiver of constitutional rights.
• Ramsey v. State
  408 So. 2d 675· Fla. 4th DCA· 1981-12-30 ·cited 20×
  Ramsey appealed the denial of his motion to vacate a guilty plea and sentence for aggravated assault, alleging his trial counsel erroneously advised him about the mandatory minimum sentence requirements. The court reversed and remanded for an evidentiary hearing, finding that aff
• Burden v. State OF Ala.
  584 F.2d 100· 5th Cir.· 1978-11-17 ·cited 20×
  The court held that the state record was insufficient to determine if the guilty plea was voluntary, requiring a remand for a hearing on that issue.
• Toler v. Wyrick
  563 F.2d 372· 8th Cir.· 1977-10-12 ·cited 20×
  A federal court must grant an evidentiary hearing in a habeas corpus action if relevant facts are disputed and a fair evidentiary hearing was not granted in state court; however, if no relevant facts are disputed, the court may dismiss the petition without a hearing.
• Wojtowicz v. United States
  550 F.2d 786· 2d Cir.· 1977-02-22 ·cited 20×
  The court held that a defendant is entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his competency at the time of sentencing if he raises sufficiently detailed and controverted factual allegations, even if the claim is raised for the first time in a post-conviction petition.
• Trahan v. Estelle
  544 F.2d 1305· 5th Cir.· 1977-01-10 ·cited 20×
  A guilty plea, entered with advice of counsel, breaks the chain of prior constitutional violations, and federal habeas relief is limited to the voluntariness and knowing character of the plea itself.
• United States v. Boone
  543 F.2d 1090· 4th Cir.· 1976-11-08 ·cited 20×
  A defendant is entitled to plead anew if a district court accepts his guilty plea without fully adhering to the procedure provided for in Rule 11, as amended.
• 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.
• United States ex rel. Preston Pebworth v. Conte
  489 F.2d 266· 9th Cir.· 1974-01-02 ·cited 20×
  A defendant must be advised of the direct consequences of a guilty plea, including the potential punishment, to ensure the plea is knowing and voluntary.
• United States v. Presley
  478 F.2d 163· 5th Cir.· 1973-05-04 ·cited 20×·via Knowing And Voluntary Plea
  The court held that appellants should have been permitted to withdraw their nolo contendere pleas and proceed to trial, as the intervening Supreme Court decision raised substantial questions about the federal nature of the charges.