Carter v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Carter v. State

183 So. 2d 883, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5636

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 15, 1966

DocketNo. 65-198

StatusPublished

This text of 183 So. 2d 883 (Carter v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carter v. State, 183 So. 2d 883, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5636 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant- plead guilty to an indictment for first degree murder, and on March 17, 1958, the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment. His first motion for relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule I, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix was denied on October 29, 1964.

On October 7, 1964, the appellant filed a second motion for relief, pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule I. The lower court conducted a full evidentiary hearing on defendant’s second Rule I motion. At the conclusion of the hearing the motion was denied and this appeal followed. The sole basis of this appeal is appellant’s contention that his confession and subsequent guilty plea were illegally obtained because the confession was procured in violation of his right to counsel at interrogation. Appellant relies upon Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964). The proposition announced in Escobedo does not have retroactive effect in the State of Florida'. Bell v. State, Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d 80; Lawrence v. State, [884]*884Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 467 [opinion filed February 8, 1966]. See also Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1964, 169 So.2d 861; Lee v. State, Fla.App.1965, 173 So.2d 520.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The appellant- plead guilty to an indictment for first degree murder, and on March 17, 1958, the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment. His first motion for relief pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule I, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix was denied on October 29, 1964.

On October 7, 1964, the appellant filed a second motion for relief, pursuant to Criminal Procedure Rule I. The lower court conducted a full evidentiary hearing on defendant’s second Rule I motion. At the conclusion of the hearing the motion was denied and this appeal followed. The sole basis of this appeal is appellant’s contention that his confession and subsequent guilty plea were illegally obtained because the confession was procured in violation of his right to counsel at interrogation. Appellant relies upon Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 84 S.Ct. 1758, 12 L.Ed.2d 977 (1964). The proposition announced in Escobedo does not have retroactive effect in the State of Florida'. Bell v. State, Fla.App.1965, 175 So.2d 80; Lawrence v. State, [884]*884Fla.App.1966, 182 So.2d 467 [opinion filed February 8, 1966]. See also Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1964, 169 So.2d 861; Lee v. State, Fla.App.1965, 173 So.2d 520.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

183 So. 2d 883, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5636, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carter-v-state-fladistctapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack