History
  • No items yet
midpage
Smith v. State
326 So. 2d 236
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1976
Check Treatment
PER CURIAM.

Appellant, a minor, was charged with breaking and entering with intent to commit a misdemeanor, to wit: petit larceny. He pled guilty and was later sentenced to three years imprisonment.

Since appellant does not suggest that he was prejudiced by the trial court’s failure to establish a factual basis for the charge, that error is insufficient to require either vacating the plea or remanding for further proceedings. Williams v. State, Fla.1975, 316 So.2d 267; State v. Lyles, Fla.1975, 316 So.2d 277. However, we find the plea colloquy wholly insufficient to establish either the voluntariness of the plea or the appellant’s understanding of its consequences. Boykin v. Alabama, 1969, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274; RCrP 3.170(j). We think that under Williams v. State, supra, the appropriate remedy is to remand for a determination of whether the plea was voluntarily and intelligently made. See also Williamson v. State, Fla.App.2d 1973, 273 So.2d 784.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

McNULTY, C. J., and HOBSON and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Smith v. State
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Jan 30, 1976
Citation: 326 So. 2d 236
Docket Number: No. 75-405
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.