James v. State
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
Arthur James’ allegation that his plea to three counts of aggravated battery was not knowing and voluntary because his trial counsel affirmatively misinformed him that, through the operation of control release, he would serve only seven months of his twelve-year sentence in prison states a facially sufficient claim for relief under Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Where a petitioner alleges that trial counsel affirmatively misinformed him as to the amount of time petitioner would spend in prison, the plea agreement form and the petitioner’s oral statements at the sentencing…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Eady v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
- Eady v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1993
- Smith v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
3Cited by2 opinions
- Gilyard v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996
- Armstrong v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996