Williams v. State

Citation316 So.2d 267
Decision Date23 June 1975
Docket NumberNo. 46697,46697
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
PartiesJohn Henry WILLIAMS, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

James A. Gardner, Public Defender, and Harold H. Moore, Asst. Public Defender, for petitioner.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Richard G. Pippinger, Asst. Atty. Gen., for respondent.

OVERTON, Justice.

This cause is before us on petition for writ of certiorari to review an as yet unreported decision of the Second District Court of Appeal. 1 Conflict is alleged with Lyles v. State, 299 So.2d 146 (Fla.App.1st 1974). At issue is the proper interpretation of that part of Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(j) which requires the trial court, when receiving a guilty plea, to determine 'that there is a factual basis for the plea of guilty.'

In the instant case, the Second District found that the trial court had failed to determine a factual basis for the plea of guilty, but that this failure did not require a reversal and a vacation of the guilty plea absent a showing that the defendant was prejudiced by noncompliance with the rule. The District Court further recognized that its decision directly conflicted with Lyles v. State, supra. Because of the conflict and its belief that the decision passed upon a question of great public interest, the District Court certified to us the following question:

'IS IT REVERSIBLE ERROR FOR THE TRIAL COURT TO HAVE ACCEPTED A PLEA OF GUILTY WITHOUT FIRST ASCERTAINING THAT THERE IS A FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE PLEA OF GUILTY WHERE THE DEFENDANT DOES NOT CONTEND THAT THERE WAS NO FACTUAL BASIS FOR THE GUILTY PLEA OR THAT HE WAS MISTAKEN IN THE BELIEF THAT HIS CONDUCT AMOUNTED TO AN ADMISSION OF THE CRIME CHARGED AND TO WHICH HE PLEADED GUILTY?' 2

There is conflict in the decisions of the District Courts, and we agree that the issue is creating confusion in the criminal justice system and must be definitively answered. We have jurisdiction under Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution.

Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.170(j), requiring interpretation, reads as follows:

'Responsibility of Court on Pleas. No plea of guilty or nolo contendere shall be accepted by a court without first determining, in open court, with means of recording the proceedings stenographically or by mechanical means, that the circumstances surrounding the plea reflect a full understanding of the significance of the plea and its voluntariness, and that there is a factual basis for the plea of guilty.

'A complete record of the proceedings at which a defendant pleads shall be kept by the court.'

This rule is patterned in part after Federal Rule 11 and Standard 1.6, American Bar Association Standards of Criminal Justice. It sets out the guidelines necessary to meet the requirements expressed in Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274 (1969); Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742, 90 S.Ct. 1463, 25 L.Ed.2d 747 (1970); and McCarthy v. United States, 394 U.S. 459, 89 S.Ct. 1166, 22 L.Ed.2d 418 (1969).

The taking of a guilty plea is one of the most important tasks of a trial judge. 3 As many as ninety percent of the criminal felony cases in a particular jurisdiction may be disposed of by a guilty plea. Surprisingly, fifty to sixty percent of the post-conviction proceedings heard in the federal and state courts come from defendants who have entered a plea of guilty. This illustrates the importance of a proper and thorough inquiry by the court at the time of the guilty plea in order to insulate the plea from unnecessary appellate and post-conviction proceedings.

A plea of guilty is both a confession and a conviction. By entering a plea of guilty, the defendant is consenting to the judgment of conviction. Boykin v. Alabama, supra. Clearly, it is an extremely important step in the criminal process and should not be hurried or treated summarily. 4

Our Criminal Rule 3.170 principally sets forth necessary procedural steps to comply with the constitutional mandate of Boykin v. Alabama,supra. The defendant must be present before the court, and the proceedings must be recorded. The following are the three essential requirements for taking a guilty plea: (1) the plea must be voluntary; (2) the defendant must understand the nature of the charge and the consequences of his plea; and (3) there must be a factual basis for the plea.

To understand the reason for determining a 'factual basis for a plea,' it is necessary first to discuss the purpose of each of the other elements.

First, a plea must be voluntary. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that the plea is made of a defendant's own free will without threats or coercion. Boykin v. Alabama, supra; Brady v. United States,supra. A guilty plea is Not deemed coerced because a defendant is influenced by the fear of a possibly higher penalty for the crime charged in the event the State is put to its proof, provided there is no specific threat or statement made by the judge or prosecutor. Brady v. United States, supra. In the words of the United States Supreme Court: 'The standard was and remains whether the plea represents a voluntary and intelligent choice among the alternative courses of action open to the defendant.' North Carolina v. Alford, 400 U.S. 25, 31, 91 S.Ct. 160, 164, 27 L.Ed.2d 162 (1970).

Second, a defendant must understand the nature of the charge and the consequences of his plea. The purpose of this requirement is to ensure that he knows what particular act he has committed, what law he has violated, and what maximum penalty may be imposed for the offense with which he is charged. He must also know that entry of a guilty plea constitutes a waiver of certain constitutional rights, specifically his right to remain silent, have a jury trial, have process to obtain witnesses on his behalf, and confront witnesses who are his accusers. Boykin v. Alabama, supra. If he has raised defenses in the proceeding, such as a motion to suppress evidence, he should understand that he has waived these defenses by pleading guilty. See McMann v. Richardson, 397 U.S. 759, 90 S.Ct. 1441, 25 L.Ed.2d 763 (1970).

The third element, which is the primary issue in this proceeding, requires the trial court to determine whether there is a factual basis for the plea. In addressing this issue, we must consider (1) the purpose of the requirement; (2) what the phrase 'factual basis for a plea' requires a trial court to do; and (3) what sanction or relief is imposed for a trial court's failure to comply with this requirement.

The sole purpose of the provision is to determine the accuracy of the plea, thereby avoiding a mistake. The trial judge, under this provision, is to ensure that the facts of the case fit the offense with which the defendant is charged. The purpose has been more fully expressed in the committee notes to Federal Rule 11:

'A new sentence is added at the end of the rule to impose a duty on the court in cases where the defendant pleads guilty to satisfy itself that there is a factual basis for the plea before entering judgment. The court should satisfy itself, by inquiry of the defendant or the attorney for the government, or by examining the presentence report, or otherwise, that the conduct which the defendant admits constitutes the offense charged in the indictment or information or an offense included therein to which the defendant has pleaded guilty. Such inquiry should, e.g., protect a defendant who is in the position of pleading voluntarily with an understanding of the nature of the charge but without realizing that his conduct does not actually fall within the charge. For a similar requirement see Mich.Stat.Ann. § 28.1058 (1954); Mich.Sup.Ct. Rule 35A; In re Valle, 364 Mich. 471, 110 N.W.2d 673 (1961); People v. Barrows, 358 Mich. 267, 99 N.W.2d 347 (1959); People v. Bumpus, 355 Mich. 374, 94 N.W.2d 854 (1959); People v. Coates, 337 Mich. 56, 59 N.W.2d 83 (1953). See also Stinson v. United States, 316 F.2d 554 (5th Cir. 1963). The normal consequence of a determination that there is not a factual basis for the plea would be for the court to set aside the plea and enter a plea of not guilty.' 5

The Florida rule containing this provision was proposed by a committee created by this Court to submit Rules of Criminal Procedure necessary to implement the American Bar Association Standards of Criminal Justice. Florida Criminal Rule 3.170(j) was written to implement Standard 1.6, Pleas of Guilty, American Bar Association Standards of Criminal Justice. That Standard provides:

'1.6 Determining accuracy of plea.

'Notwithstanding the acceptance of a plea of guilty, the court should not enter a judgment upon such plea without making such inquiry as may satisfy it that there is a factual basis for the plea.'

The comment following the Standard discusses its purpose and says in part:

'. . . (T)he risk that a plea which is obtained without resort to threats or other improper inducements and which is entered with full understanding of the possible consequences might nonetheless be inaccurate remains a matter of concern. . . .'

This comment recognizes that a plea may meet the test of voluntariness, knowledge and understanding of the consequences, yet still be inaccurate.

Clearly, the purpose is to avoid a defendant's mistakenly entering a plea of guilty to the wrong offense. To preclude this possibility, the trial judge is given considerable discretion to determine whether there is a factual basis for the plea. As stated in the commentary to Standard 1.6, Pleas of Guilty:

'. . . Many judges make a detailed inquiry of the defendant concerning the precise nature of his conduct. Others use a post-plea-of-guilty hearing, at which physical evidence or statements may be produced or witnesses may be examined. Elsewhere judges have required that the presentence investigation focus more directly upon the facts surrounding the alleged crime to which the defendant has entered a plea. . ....

To continue reading

Request your trial
231 cases
  • Woods v. Sec'y, Fla. Dep't of Corr.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 19 Mayo 2020
    ...accuracy and avoid mistake, the method for determining that factual basis is largely within the judge's discretion. Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267, 272-73 (Fla. 1975). The Court may rely on arrest and police affidavits to find a factual basis for a plea. Cuevas v. State, 770 So. 2d 703, ......
  • State v. Ballard
    • United States
    • Ohio Supreme Court
    • 24 Junio 1981
    ...352 So.2d 33; People v. Rizer (1971), 5 Cal.3d 35, 484 P.2d 1367; State v. Bugbee (1971), 161 Conn. 531, 290 A.2d 332; Williams v. State (Fla.1975), 316 So.2d 267; Williams v. State (1975), 263 Ind. 165, 325 N.E.2d 827; Brainard v. State (Iowa 1974), 222 N.W.2d 711; People v. Jaworski (1972......
  • State v. Reaves
    • United States
    • Iowa Supreme Court
    • 25 Mayo 1977
    ...A.2d 648 (D.C.App.1976). 10. Florida. Rule 3.170, Fla.R.Crim.P., is patterned on federal rule 11 and the ABA standards. Williams v. State, 316 So.2d 267 (Fla.1975); State v. Lyles, 316 So.2d 277 (Fla.1975); Lamadline v. State, 303 So.2d 17 11. Georgia. When a defendant raises the question o......
  • Lynch v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Middle District of Florida
    • 25 Septiembre 2012
    ...State, 648 So. 2d 294, 295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995) (quoting Suarez v. State, 616 So. 2d 1067, 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), citing Williams v. State, 316 So. 2d 267 (Fla. 1975)). If the state court "file contains substantiation of the factual basis, the [state trial] court may deny [a post-conviction......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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