Haywood v. State
218 So. 2d 242, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6252
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 15, 1969·No. No. 68-395·Published·Cited by 5 cases
Opinion
Appellant contends that his petition under Rule 1.850, F.R.C.P., 33 F.S.A., was [243] erroneously denied without an evidentiary hearing. The petition alleges improper reception of a guilty plea. The record indicates that the trial judge asked a long and appropriate series of questions the answers to which indicate clearly that the appellant knowingly and intelligently entered a plea of guilty.
Oral argument is dispensed with as serving no useful purpose pursuant to Rule 3.10, subd. e, F.A.R., 32 F.S.A.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Haywood v. State, 218 So. 2d 242, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6252 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).
218 So. 2d 242 (Haywood v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hooper v. State
232 So. 2d 257 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
Hayward v. State
230 So. 2d 160 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
Mathis v. State
228 So. 2d 629 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)
Dawson v. State
224 So. 2d 388 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)
Frizzell v. State
220 So. 2d 32 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)