RIGOBERTO MORALES v. THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed November 30, 2022.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D22-700

Lower Tribunal No. 15-100-A-K

________________

Rigoberto Morales,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Mark H. Jones, Judge.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner, Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Katryna Santa Cruz, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, SCALES and GORDO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See LeDuc v. State, 415 So. 2d 721, 722 (Fla. 1982) (finding that where a motion to withdraw a plea occurs after sentencing, the defendant has the burden of proving that a “manifest injustice has occurred”); Ingraham v. State, 248 So. 3d 153, 154–55 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) (“[T]he motion to withdraw plea must be more than a mere recitation of general allegations.”); Powell v. State, 929 So. 2d 54, 55 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) (“[C]onclusory allegations are insufficient. Rather, a defendant must offer some proof that his plea was not voluntarily entered.”); Saintiler v. State, 109 So. 3d 303, 305 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (affirming a trial court’s summary denial of a defendant’s motion to withdraw a plea as the motion was “facially insufficient because the [defendant] did not set forth any factual basis to support his conclusory allegations”).