Davy v. State

Decision Date07 February 1978
Docket NumberNos. 77-963 and 77-964,s. 77-963 and 77-964
Citation356 So.2d 18
PartiesRichard DAVY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.
CourtFlorida District Court of Appeals

John W. Tanner, P. A., Daytona Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Harry M. Hipler, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

DAUKSCH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a denial of a hearing sought under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. Appellant has alleged he was induced to enter his pleas by his court appointed attorney with the assurances that he would receive no greater sentence than two concurrent life sentences and that he "would more than likely pull no more than five years." Appellant had been charged with robbery and murder in the first degree. He pleaded to murder two and robbery and was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences and has probably come to understand since he reached prison that his chances of serving more than five years are quite assured.

Because appellant has barely alleged improper inducements, we must remand this matter for hearing under Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. Cooley v. State, Fla.App., 245 So.2d 679.

Reversed and remanded.

DOWNEY, J., and BURNSTEIN, Associate Judge, concur.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Nova v. State, 82-1766
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 13 Septiembre 1983
    ...v. New York, 404 U.S. 257, 92 S.Ct. 495, 30 L.Ed.2d 427 (1971); Griffith v. Wyrick, 527 F.2d 109 (8th Cir.1975); Davy v. State, 356 So.2d 18 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Britt v. State, 352 So.2d 148 (Fla. 2d DCA Finally, we consider whether Nova's motion could have been properly denied by the tria......
  • Rice v. State, 80-776
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 17 Diciembre 1980
    ...the court to permit petitioner to withdraw his plea is facially sufficient. Brown v. State, 245 So.2d 41 (Fla.1971); Davy v. State, 356 So.2d 18 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). Since the record before us does not conclusively show that appellant is entitled to no relief, we are compelled to reverse th......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT