Plymale v. State
| Decision Date | 25 January 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 65-41,65-41 |
| Citation | 182 So.2d 57 |
| Parties | James Ralph PLYMALE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Wicker, Smith, Pyszka, Blomqvist & Davant, Miami, for appellant.
Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., and James T. Carlisle, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HENDRY, C. J., and TILLMAN PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.
The appellant pled guilty to the charges in five separate informations, to wit: No. 61-5345, robbery; No. 61-5387, robbery; No. 61-5388, robbery; No. 61-5716, assault with intent to commit a felony (murder in the first degree); No. 61-5717, assault with intent to commit a felony (murder in the first degree). He was sentenced on the robbery charges to a total of 30 years, the sentences running consecutively. He was sentenced on each of the assault charges for a term of 20 years, the sentences to run concurrently with the sentences imposed on the robbery charges and each other. Appellant was represented in the trial court by the Public Defender, and he is represented on this appeal by appellate counsel appointed by the trial court.
Appellant's motion for relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, was denied without evidentiary hearing and this appeal followed. We reverse with directions to grant an evidentiary hearing on two of the grounds stated in the motion. We will confine our discussion to these two grounds because the other allegations either to not constitute grounds for relief under Criminal Procedure Rule 1 or are stated merely as conclusions without supporting factual allegations.
Appellant's sworn petition alleged that he pled guilty because he had been physically abused, threatened with the arrest of members of his family and his girl friend unless he confessed, and promised their immunity from prosecution if he would confess, plead guilty and 'not cause any trouble at his coming trial.' We hold that these allegations are sufficient, upon the record in this case, to state a ground for relief.
There is nothing in the record that refutes the allegations or otherwise conclusively precludes relief; therefore, the court erred in denying the petition without affording the petitioner an opportunity to present evidence. Sampson v. State, Fla.App.1963, 158, So.2d 771.
The second allegation upon which we think the petitioner was entitled to a hearing is to the effect that the petitioner was not properly represented by his court-appointed counsel. We have previously stated the rule that incompetency of court-appointed counsel is not a ground for relief in a Rule 1 proceeding...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Garmise
...1st DCA 1974); Potts v. State, 242 So.2d 729 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971); Meinsen v. State, 240 So.2d 188 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970); Plymale v. State, 182 So.2d 57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); Wade v. State, 177 So.2d 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965); Taylor v. State, 171 So.2d 402 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965); Sam v. State, 167 So.2d......
-
Brumley v. State
...Criminal Procedure Rule 1.850. Jones v. State, Fla.App.1964, 165 So.2d 191; Reddick v. State, Fla.App.1966, 190 So.2d 340; Plymale v. State, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 57; and Waley v. Johnston, 1942, 316 U.S. 101, 62 S.Ct. 964, 86 L.Ed. The allegations in the motion that the appellant was thr......
-
Plymale v. State, 66-812
...pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix. Following the rendition of the opinion reported in Plymale v. State, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 57, the appellant's petition for relief came on for evidentiary hearing before the trial court, wherein the appellant (represented......
-
O'Fallon v. State, 70168
...Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 786; Dozier v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 506; Smith v. State, Fla.App.1966, 192 So.2d 41; Plymale v. State, Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 57; State v. Barton, Fla.1967, 194 So.2d The order appealed is-- Affirmed. LILES, A.C.J., and McNULTY, J., concur. ...