McLeod v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McLeod v. State

700 So. 2d 458, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11892, 1997 WL 656329

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 22, 1997·No. No. 96-3897·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We reverse an order denying Appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief and request to withdraw his plea, on allegations that the plea was coerced. Appellant’s claims are not refuted by the record. Therefore, we remand for an evidentiary hearing as to whether the plea was coerced and, therefore, involuntary.

We have considered and reject the state’s assertion that the motion is an improper successive motion. Although Appellant did file a separate motion requesting a correction of gain time, that was essentially a motion to correct a sentence. The allegations here are substantially different and distinct.

STONE, C.J., and WARNER and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We reverse an order denying Appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief and request to withdraw his plea, on allegations that the plea was coerced. Appellant’s claims are not refuted by the record. Therefore, we remand for an evidentiary hearing as to whether the plea was coerced and, therefore, involuntary.

We have considered and reject the state’s assertion that the motion is an improper successive motion. Although Appellant did file a separate motion requesting a correction of gain time, that was essentially a motion to correct a sentence. The allegations here are substantially different and distinct.

STONE, C.J., and WARNER and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.

McLeod v. State, 700 So. 2d 458, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 11892, 1997 WL 656329 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

700 So. 2d 458 (McLeod v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related