Willie Charles Franklin v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

Fifth Circuit

Willie Charles Franklin v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

381 F.2d 322, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 5777

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

DecidedJune 29, 1967

Docket24155

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 381 F.2d 322 (Willie Charles Franklin v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Willie Charles Franklin v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, 381 F.2d 322, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 5777 (5th Cir. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a denial of habeas corpus without an evidentiary hearing. The appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1965 upon his plea of nolo contendere in the Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida.

Under Florida law the plea of nolo contendere, when accepted by the court, has the same effect as a plea of guilty. Peel v. State, Fla.App.1963, 150 So.2d 281, cert, den., 380 U.S. 986, 85 S.Ct. 1359, 14 L.Ed.2d 279.

The appellant did not allege in his habeas corpus petition that there was any vice in his plea of nolo contendere, which he entered upon advice of his court-appointed counsel. He alleged merely that certain personal property was illegally obtained from him following his allegedly illegal arrest without a warrant.

The rule which this Court stated in Busby v. Holman, 5 Cir. 1966, 356 F.2d 75, 77, 78, is dispositive of this appeal. There we said, “It is settled by a host of authorities that a judgment on a plea of guilty which has been entered voluntarily on advice of counsel is not rendered invalid because the defendant had previously made a confession under circumstances which might have rendered it inadmissible in evidence if the defendant had pleaded not guilty and had gone to trial. This is so because the plea, if voluntarily and understandingly made, is conclusive as to the defendant’s guilt, admitting all the facts charged and waiving all non-jurisdictional defects in the prior proceedings against him. The judgment and sentence which follow a plea of guilty are based solely upon the plea and not upon any evidence which may have been acquired improperly by the prosecutor. * * * ”

The appellant’s habeas petition contained no allegations which would require the district court to hold an evidentiary hearing on its merits. Therefore, the judgment of the district court must be affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM:

This is an appeal from a denial of habeas corpus without an evidentiary hearing. The appellant was sentenced to life imprisonment in 1965 upon his plea of nolo contendere in the Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida.

Under Florida law the plea of nolo contendere, when accepted by the court, has the same effect as a plea of guilty. Peel v. State, Fla.App.1963, 150 So.2d 281, cert, den., 380 U.S. 986, 85 S.Ct. 1359, 14 L.Ed.2d 279.

The appellant did not allege in his habeas corpus petition that there was any vice in his plea of nolo contendere, which he entered upon advice of his court-appointed counsel. He alleged merely that certain personal property was illegally obtained from him following his allegedly illegal arrest without a warrant.

The rule which this Court stated in Busby v. Holman, 5 Cir. 1966, 356 F.2d 75, 77, 78, is dispositive of this appeal. There we said, “It is settled by a host of authorities that a judgment on a plea of guilty which has been entered voluntarily on advice of counsel is not rendered invalid because the defendant had previously made a confession under circumstances which might have rendered it inadmissible in evidence if the defendant had pleaded not guilty and had gone to trial. This is so because the plea, if voluntarily and understandingly made, is conclusive as to the defendant’s guilt, admitting all the facts charged and waiving all non-jurisdictional defects in the prior proceedings against him. The judgment and sentence which follow a plea of guilty are based solely upon the plea and not upon any evidence which may have been acquired improperly by the prosecutor. * * * ”

The appellant’s habeas petition contained no allegations which would require the district court to hold an evidentiary hearing on its merits. Therefore, the judgment of the district court must be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

381 F.2d 322, 1967 U.S. App. LEXIS 5777, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/willie-charles-franklin-v-louie-l-wainwright-director-division-of-ca5-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack