Montrose v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Montrose v. State

456 So. 2d 571, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2061, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15228

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 27, 1984

DocketNo. 84-813

StatusPublished

This text of 456 So. 2d 571 (Montrose 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

Montrose v. State, 456 So. 2d 571, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2061, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15228 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The transcription of the plea taking dialogue in this case is insufficient to establish the factual basis, as required by Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.172(a), for a plea of guilty to aggravated battery (§ 784.045(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1981)). The order summarily denying defendant’s 3.850 motion is reversed and this cause is remanded for a full adversary hearing and determination as to whether the underlying facts in this case as to the element of “great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement” are adequate to support the guilty plea. If the trial court finds the underlying facts to be insufficient in that regard, the trial court shall also make an inquiry into, and adjudication as to, the competency of the defense counsel who represented the defendant when he entered his plea of guilty.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DAUKSCH, SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The transcription of the plea taking dialogue in this case is insufficient to establish the factual basis, as required by Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.172(a), for a plea of guilty to aggravated battery (§ 784.045(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1981)). The order summarily denying defendant’s 3.850 motion is reversed and this cause is remanded for a full adversary hearing and determination as to whether the underlying facts in this case as to the element of “great bodily harm, permanent disability, or permanent disfigurement” are adequate to support the guilty plea. If the trial court finds the underlying facts to be insufficient in that regard, the trial court shall also make an inquiry into, and adjudication as to, the competency of the defense counsel who represented the defendant when he entered his plea of guilty.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

DAUKSCH, SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

456 So. 2d 571, 9 Fla. L. Weekly 2061, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 15228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/montrose-v-state-fladistctapp-1984.