Williams v. State

2 Citing cases

  1. Allen v. State

    876 So. 2d 737 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)   Cited 7 times
    Granting petition for second-tier certiorari and determining circuit court "failed to comply with the established principle of law which holds that it is fundamental error to convict a defendant in the absence of a prima facie showing of the elements of the offense charged"

    Where, in the course of a plea colloquy, the defendant raises the possibility of a defense, "the potential prejudice is considered apparent and a further inquiry by the trial court is necessary." Williams v. State, 534 So.2d 929, 930 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988) (citing State v. Kendrick, 336 So.2d 353 (Fla. 1976)). If the trial court does not conduct an adequate inquiry with regard to the asserted defense, the defendant has demonstrated prejudice and is entitled to a writ of certiorari and remand for further inquiry into the factual basis for the plea. See Williams, 534 So.2d at 931; Farley v. City of Tallahassee, 243 So.2d 161, 162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971) (state must establish every element of the crime charged independently of any admission or confession of the defendant).

  2. D.M. v. Dep't of Children & Families

    No. 3D19-2379 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. Apr. 22, 2020)

    A trial court should not accept a guilty plea where the allegations, if proven, would not establish the commission of the crime to which the defendant is pleading guilty. See, e.g., Williams v. State, 534 So. 2d 929 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Waugh v. State, 388 So. 2d 253 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980); Estes v. State, 294 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). In like fashion, rule 8.520(c) seeks to ensure that a trial court will not terminate a parent's parental rights, based upon a voluntary surrender, unless the allegations of the petition would, if proven, establish a legally sufficient basis for termination of parental rights.