Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

MICHAEL FRANCIS SMITH, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, a minor, was charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, to wit: petit larceny. He pled guilty and was later sentenced to three years imprisonment.

Since appellant does not suggest that he was prejudiced by the trial court's failure to establish a factual basis for the charge, that error is insufficient to require either vacating the plea or remanding for further proceedings. Williams v. State, Fla. 1975, 316 So.2d 267; State v. Lyles, Fla. 1975, 316 So.2d 277. However, we find the plea colloquy wholly insufficient to establish either the voluntariness of the plea or the appellant's understanding of its consequences. Boykin v. Alabama, 1969, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274; RCrP 3.170(j). We think that under Williams v. State, supra, the appropriate remedy is to remand for a determination of whether the plea was voluntarily and intelligently made. See also Williamson v. State, Fla.App.2d 1973, 273 So.2d 784.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

McNULTY, C.J., and HOBSON and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

SMITH v. STATE
(Feb 27, 1976)