Chisholm v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Chisholm v. State

247 So. 2d 93, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6620

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 20, 1971

DocketNo. 70-974

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 247 So. 2d 93 (Chisholm 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

Chisholm v. State, 247 So. 2d 93, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6620 (Fla. Ct. App. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was indicted for the crime of rape. He pleaded not guilty and was brought to trial before a jury. At the conclusion of the presentation of the evidence the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to guilty. He was so adjudged, and was sentenced to imprisonment for life, and is now confined pursuant thereto in the state penitentiary. The present appeal is taken by the defendant from the denial by the trial court of his third motion filed under Rule 1.850 CrPR, 33 F.S.A., for relief from the judgment and sentence. The grounds of the present motion are substantially the same as those considered and rejected by the trial court on a prior motion by an order which was appealed to this court and affirmed. For that reason alone the order which is presently challenged was proper. Whitney v. State, Fla.App. 1966, 184 So.2d 207. Moreover, the appellant has made no showing in the record presented here that appropriate procedures were not employed by the trial court on the occasion of the defendant’s change of plea during the trial. See Garcia v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So.2d 300.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was indicted for the crime of rape. He pleaded not guilty and was brought to trial before a jury. At the conclusion of the presentation of the evidence the defendant changed his plea from not guilty to guilty. He was so adjudged, and was sentenced to imprisonment for life, and is now confined pursuant thereto in the state penitentiary. The present appeal is taken by the defendant from the denial by the trial court of his third motion filed under Rule 1.850 CrPR, 33 F.S.A., for relief from the judgment and sentence. The grounds of the present motion are substantially the same as those considered and rejected by the trial court on a prior motion by an order which was appealed to this court and affirmed. For that reason alone the order which is presently challenged was proper. Whitney v. State, Fla.App. 1966, 184 So.2d 207. Moreover, the appellant has made no showing in the record presented here that appropriate procedures were not employed by the trial court on the occasion of the defendant’s change of plea during the trial. See Garcia v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So.2d 300.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 So. 2d 93, 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/chisholm-v-state-fladistctapp-1971.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack