Bell v. State, 71--392
| Decision Date | 19 May 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 71--392,71--392 |
| Citation | 262 So.2d 244 |
| Parties | Harry Lee BELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Walter N. Colbath, Jr., Public Defender, and Charles W. Musgrove, Asst. Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Nelson E. Bailey, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.
Appellant Bell was found guilty on April 15, 1971, by a jury of robbery and possession of a short barreled shotgun and was sentenced on March 16, 1971.
When appellant was arraigned, he pled not guilty to four counts as follows:
1. Conspiracy to commit a felony
2. Grand larceny
3. Possession of short barreled shotgun
4. Carrying concealed firearm.
On February 10, 1971, the appellant, with leave of court, withdrew his plea of not guilty and entered a plea of guilty as to count 1, conspiracy to commit a felony and attempted grand larceny, a lesser offense under count 2. On March 19, 1971, appellant Bell voluntarily filed a motion to withdraw the guilty pleas which after due consideration was granted by the court.
On March 24, 1971, a new information was filed in four counts as follows:
and on March 29, 1971, appellant entered a plea of not guilty on each count. After conviction on counts 1 and 2 of the new information and denial of a motion for new trial, appellant brought this appeal based on four assignments of error.
Assignments 2, 3 and 4 are without merit, so they will not be discussed. However, assignment of error 1 which was as follows:
'The trial court erred in permitting the defendant to stand trial on a higher charge than he pled to,'
raises the issue of double jeopardy.
The first time this defense has been raised by the appellant is on appeal and so the failure of the appellant to raise the issue of double jeopardy in the trial constitutes a waiver of that defense. Suiero v. State, 248 So.2d 219 (Fla.App.1971); Robinson v. State, 239 So.2d 282 (Fla.App.1970).
When the appellant withdrew his plea of guilty and it was accepted by the court, it was as if a plea had never been entered ab initio. To hold otherwise would cause the trial courts to be apprehensive of accepting or allowing the withdrawal of a plea because such discretionary action might prevent justice from being carried out.
A...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Akins v. State
...5th DCA 1983); Drakes v. State, 400 So.2d 487 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Chapman v. State, 389 So.2d 1065 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); Bell v. State, 262 So.2d 244 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972).18 See, e.g., Gibbs v. Mayo, 81 So.2d 739 (Fla.1955); State v. Whisnant, 80 So.2d 611 (Fla.1955).19 See, e.g., Chapman v.......
-
Koenig v. State
...the oath to a properly selected jury was waived by the defendant's failure to move to dismiss on jeopardy grounds, see Bell v. State, 262 So.2d 244 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 265 So.2d 50 (Fla.1972); Suiero v. State, 248 So.2d 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Robinson v. Wainwright, 240 So.2d 65......
-
Johnson v. State, 83-51
...285, 296, and cases cited therein. In Florida, the Second and Fourth Districts follow the majority view. See, e.g., Bell v. State, 262 So.2d 244 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 265 So.2d 50 (Fla.1972); Suiero v. State, 248 So.2d 219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Robinson v. Wainwright, 240 So.2d 65 (F......
-
State v. Riggins
...State v. McClain , 509 So.2d 1360, 1361 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987) (same). The basis for the holdings in these cases is Bell v. Florida , 262 So.2d 244, 245 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972). The Bell holding on the issue is as follows:When the appellant withdrew his plea of guilty and it was acce......