Burau v. State, 76-1256
| Decision Date | 15 November 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 76-1256,76-1256 |
| Parties | Rene Eugene BURAU, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, and Karen M. Gottlieb, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Margarita G. Esquiroz and Ronald A. Dion, Asst. Attys. Gen., Miami, and Lonworth Butler, Jr., Legal Intern, for appellee.
Before PEARSON, HAVERFIELD and NATHAN, JJ.
Defendant, Rene Eugene Burau, seeks reversal of an order denying, without an evidentiary hearing, his motion to vacate judgment and sentence of five years in the state penitentiary on the ground that the trial judge had been unduly influenced by extensive prejudicial press publicity and, thus, imposed the sentence upon wrongfully considered criteria.
Defendant was tried non-jury and found guilty of aggravated assault. A pre-sentence investigation was ordered. At the conclusion of the sentencing hearing on July 8, 1975, at which several members of the news media were present at the request of the victim's father, the judge indicated that he would withhold adjudication and defer sentencing for six months. Defendant was ordered to receive psychiatric treatment in the interim. Thereafter a barrage of adverse publicity ensued and the prosecution filed a motion to accelerate the date of sentencing. On July 14, 1975 another sentencing hearing was held and the judge sentenced defendant to five years. Subsequently defendant filed a motion to mitigate his sentence and on October 28 the motion was denied. On May 14, 1976 defendant filed a motion to vacate sentence and adjudication pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850 on the ground that the trial judge was improperly influenced by the adverse publicity when he sentenced defendant to five The motion to vacate in the case at bar is fatally defective because the ground alleged therein was (1) known to the defendant at the time of sentencing, and (2) properly presentable on a direct appeal which defendant could have taken.
years imprisonment. Defendant also requested an evidentiary hearing. The motion to vacate was summarily denied. We affirm.
The established rule is that a motion to vacate judgment and sentence may not be used as a substitute for an appeal and matters properly presented on appeal may not be asserted as grounds for a motion to vacate. See Swindle v. State, 202 So.2d 132 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967); Suarez v. State, 220 So.2d 442 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969); Clements v. State, 320 So.2d 44 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975). Further, if the matter forming the basis of a motion to vacate was known to the defendant at the time of trial, it will not support a collateral attack on the judgment of conviction. State v. Matera, 266 So.2d...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Thompson v. Crawford, 84-428
...to vacate known to defendant at time of trial, it will not support a collateral attack on judgment of conviction); Burau v. State, 353 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977) Based on the foregoing analysis, we conclude that Thompson's fraudulent conduct constituted intrinsic fraud and cannot serve a......
-
Huffman v. Wainwright
...A defendant can waive a defect by failing to assert the point on appeal. State v. Matera, 266 So.2d 661 (Fla. 1972); Burau v. State, 353 So.2d 1183 (Fla.App.1977). Huffman was permitted an appeal only after filing a pro se motion for relief since his initial court-appointed attorney failed ......
-
Taylor v. State
...J., dissenting). First, it is plain that the panel decision cannot possibly create an intra-district conflict with Burau v. State, 353 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Abascal v. State, 345 So.2d 397 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); Costantino v. State, 224 So.2d 341 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969), as urged by the st......
-
Walcott v. State
...1st DCA 1978); Tyner v. State, 363 So.2d 1165 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Pitts v. State, 355 So.2d 505 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Burau v. State, 353 So.2d 1183 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Ashley v. State, 350 So.2d 839 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Austin v. State, 160 So.2d 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964).4 See Green v. State......