Fox v. State

150 So. 228, 112 Fla. 104, 1933 Fla. LEXIS 2176

Opinion

Per Curiam.

To an information charging a felony, the accused, apparently without understanding its import, offered a plea of nolo contendere, upon which a judgment of conviction and sentence to the State Prison was rendered. It does not appear that the accused was represented by counsel when the plea was filed. A motion to vacate the judgment and for leave to withdraw the plea of nolo contendere was supported by an affidavit of the accused that he had “never heard before of the word nolo contendere and did not know or understand its meaning, but was under the impression and believed that when he entered a plea that he was entering a plea of not guilty and that he did not “intend to plead guilty,” but is innocent. The motion was denied. This was harmful error. Judgment reversed.

Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.