From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Scott v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Dec 8, 1982
423 So. 2d 978 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Opinion

No. AN-413.

December 8, 1982.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Duval County, A.C. Soud, Jr., J.

Nathaniel Charles Scott, pro se, appellant.

No appearance for appellee.


In a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850, appellant asserted four errors:

(1) conviction obtained using evidence obtained pursuant to an unlawful arrest;

(2) conviction obtained by violating privilege against self-incrimination;

(3) denial of effective assistance of counsel;

(4) plea of guilty involuntarily entered, without understanding of consequences.

The first two issues could have been raised on direct appeal and are not properly addressed in a motion for post-conviction relief. See Goode v. State, 403 So.2d 931 (Fla. 1981); Kilpatrick v. State, 422 So.2d 934 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Questions regarding the effectiveness of assistance of counsel and the voluntariness of a guilty plea are properly raised in a Rule 3.850 motion, however, in denying the motion the trial court attached portions of the record which show conclusively that appellant is not entitled to relief.

AFFIRMED.

SHAW and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Scott v. State

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Dec 8, 1982
423 So. 2d 978 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
Case details for

Scott v. State

Case Details

Full title:NATHANIEL CHARLES SCOTT, APPELLANT, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Dec 8, 1982

Citations

423 So. 2d 978 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

Citing Cases

Perez v. State

Contending he was misinformed of the consequences of his guilty plea to a charge of burglary, Perez appeals…

Peart v. State

The proper remedy for the defendants to pursue is, instead, a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to…