Eady v. State, 92-460
| Citation | 604 So.2d 559 |
| Decision Date | 28 August 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 92-460,92-460 |
| Parties | Gregory EADY, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee. 604 So.2d 559, 17 Fla. L. Week. D2017 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Gregory Eady, pro se.
No appearance for appellee.
Appellant, Gregory Eady, appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief from the 35-year negotiated sentence upon his plea of guilty to second degree murder. Of the four grounds presented as the basis for relief, appellant's intertwined claims of an involuntary plea and ineffective assistance of counsel are not conclusively refuted by the signed negotiated plea and sentence form relied upon by the trial court for summary denial of the motion. Therefore, we reverse and remand for further proceedings.
In support of his involuntary plea and ineffective assistance of counsel claims, appellant alleged his counsel assured him he would serve no more than five years of the 35-year sentence, and that he was at risk for a 50-year sentence if he insisted upon going to trial and was found guilty. With respect to the early release claims, appellant alleged his counsel advised him that he was eligible for provisional credits, and he would be given a control release date which would reduce in proportion to the provisional credits given each month. Subsequently, appellant was informed by Department of Corrections personnel that, due to his conviction for second degree murder, he was ineligible for provisional credits and a control release date. With respect to the lengthy sentence claims, appellant alleged that his counsel coerced his plea by telling him that if he insisted upon a trial and was found guilty, the judge would be angered at the waste of taxpayers' money and would impose a 50-year sentence. Later, appellant was told that the maximum sentence for a life felony is forty years, and concluded his counsel's advice on the matter was erroneous. Appellant asserted that absent his counsel's erroneous advice regarding provisional credits and an early release from incarceration, he would not have pled guilty, and would have insisted upon going to trial.
In addition to the foregoing allegations of counsel's misrepresentations and coercion, appellant alleged the trial court relied upon an invalid reason for departure from the recommended guidelines sentence, and the scoresheet used at sentencing was calculated incorrectly. The scoresheet used in this case scored appellant's second degree murder conviction as a first degree felony punishable by life, for which 150 points were assessed. The total points scored specified a recommended guidelines sentencing range of twelve to seventeen years. As reason for departure, the scoresheet bears the notation that the departure was in the interest of justice.
The trial court rejected appellant's claim of an involuntary plea, finding it refuted by the signed plea and negotiated sentence form. The court further found that the record shows appellant acknowledged the agreement for sentence, said sentence did not include the alleged erroneous advice concerning provisional credits, and appellant stated he had not been threatened, coerced, or intimidated to plead guilty. The trial court rejected the departure sentence argument on the basis of the plea bargain, and rejected the inaccurate scoresheet argument and ineffective assistance of counsel arguments, finding appellant's allegations in both regards without merit. The order references the attached first page of the plea of guilty and negotiated sentence form, as refuting appellant's claims to entitlement to post-conviction relief.
At the outset, we agree that relief is not warranted with respect to appellant's scoresheet and departure sentence challenges. It is well settled that a plea bargain may serve as a clear and convincing reason for a departure sentence when accepted as an integral part of the plea agreement. Smith v. State, 530 So.2d 304, 305 (Fla.1988); Quarterman v. State, 527 So.2d 1380, 1382 (Fla.1988); Thornburg v. State, 591 So.2d 1121 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Since the record in this case reflects that the departure sentence was integral to the plea bargain, appellant's challenge to the validity of the reason for departure must fail.
Turning to the scoresheet challenge, appellant correctly asserted that assessment of 150 points under the category of first degree felony punishable by life was improper. "A capital felony and a life felony must be so designated by statute." Sec. 775.081(1), Fla.Stat. (1989). Second-degree murder, appellant's convicted offense, is designated by statute as "a felony of the first degree, punishable by imprisonment for a term of years not exceeding life ..." Sec. 782.04(2), Fla.Stat. (1989). In view of the statutory designation, the second-degree murder conviction should have...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cottle v. State
...in the transcript of a sentencing hearing, or by written statements to the contrary contained in a negotiated plea." Eady v. State, 604 So.2d 559, 560-61 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The resolution of a particular claim will, of course, rest upon the circumstances of that claim. Although not raised......
-
Montgomery v. State, 93-162
...of habitual offender status on gain time sufficient to require attachment of records refuting claim or hearing); Eady v. State, 604 So.2d 559 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992) (claim counsel misinformed defendant regarding eligibility for provisional gain time credits and early release sufficient to cast......
-
Monzon v. State, 93-2143
...and David T. Sale, Certified Legal Intern, for appellee. Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and COPE, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. Eady v. State, 604 So.2d 559 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Sellers v. State, 578 So.2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA, 1991), approved, 586 So.2d 340 (Fla.1991); Guardado v. State, 562 So.2d 696 ......
-
Betancourt v. State
...the decision in Betancourt v. State, 767 So.2d 557 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000), which certified conflict with the decision in Eady v. State, 604 So.2d 559 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. For the reasons set forth below, we approve the Third District's de......