Kelly v. State, M-452
| Decision Date | 02 November 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. M-452,M-452 |
| Citation | 254 So.2d 22 |
| Parties | Charles Felton KELLY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Robert P. Miller, Public Defender, for appellant.
Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and William W. Herring, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Appellant was charged with the crime of robbery. He was represented in the trial court by privately retained counsel. Initially he pled not guilty. Before trial however he changed his plea to guilty.
He now complains that under Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274, his conviction and sentence which was predicated upon said plea of guilty should be reversed because the record of the proceedings at which the trial judge accepted the guilty plea does not reflect that the trial judge advised appellant of his privilege against compulsory self-incrimination and his right to confront his accusers. Our examination of the record verifies that the two aforementioned inquires were not made.
The record of those proceedings however do reflect that two other charges were pending against appellant, and those charges were dropped in what appears to be a bargain for the guilty plea to the instant charge. Moreover, the charge to which he pled guilty carries a maximum sentence of life imprisonment, but he was sentenced to serve only twenty years. The record also shows that inquiry was made into the following matters by the trial judge:
'1. Defendant's age.
2. Defendant's education.
3. Whether or not he could read, write and speak the English language.
4. Sobriety.
5. Mental condition.
6. Whether or not defendant had discussed his plea with his mother and attorney.
7. Whether or not defendant had advised his attorney of all of the facts and circumstances concerning the offense.
8. Whether or not he understood his right to a trial by a jury.
9. Whether or not he knew he had a right to separate counsel from his co-defendant.
10. Whether or not he had any objection to his attorney.
11. Whether or not he had received any promises or offers of reward.
12. Whether or not there had been any threats or acts of duress to compel his plea.
13. Whether or not the plea was voluntary.
14. Whether or not defendant was satisfied with the services of his lawyer.
15. Whether or not he understood that all that remained to be done was to be sentenced and which could mean a life sentence.
16. Whether or not the plea was freely and voluntarily entered only because he was guilty of the offense.'
All of the answers to the above inquires were consistent with acceptance of the guilty plea.
Before tendering his guilty plea, appellant's counsel made the following statement to the court:
In our view, the record of the proceedings when taken in its totality justifies the acceptance of the guilty plea. That the court itself did not advise as to appellant's right to remain silent or right to confrontation does not mean that the plea was uncounseled or tendered unknowingly. Boykin does not require a step-by-step recitation...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. LeBlanc v. Henderson
...as to whether the Boykin rule applies in full measure to guilty pleas entered as part of plea bargain agreements. But see Kelly v. State, Fla.App., 254 So.2d 22 (1971).* See, for instance, State ex rel. Martin v. Henderson, 259 La. 707, 252 So.2d 437; State ex rel. Bakke v. Henderson, 260 L......
-
State v. Johnson
...not contain any affirmative showing as to how or under what circumstances the guilty plea was made or entered.' Recently Kelly v. State, 254 So.2d 22 (Fla.App.1971), held Boykin inapplicable to 'plea bargains' where defendant is represented by The Georgia Court read Boykin to mean Rule 11 w......
-
Saunders v. State, W-95
...trial judge. The record of the proceeding when taken in its totality is the scale upon which fundamental rights must be weighed. Kelly v. State, 254 So.2d 22 (1 Fla.App.1971); Mower v. State, First District Court of Appeal, 308 So.2d 586, Opinion filed January 28, 1975; Boykin v. Alabama, 3......
-
Mower v. State
...compulsory self-incrimination and right to be confronted by his accusers prior to accepting a bargained plea. (See Kelly v. State, Fla.App.1st 1971, 254 So.2d 22; Sumner v. State, Fla.App.1st 1974, 289 So.2d 434; Estes v. State, Fla.App.1st 1974, 294 So.2d 122; Lyles v. State, Fla.App.1st 1......