Ortiz v. State

Because the scant plea colloquy in the trial court and the balance of the record in this cause fails to conclusively refute the appellant Rodolfo G. Ortiz’ facially viable claim that his nolo contendere plea in the cause was not freely and voluntarily entered because (a) he thought he was pleading nolo contendere to one robbery charge, rather than a series of criminal charges [including a third-degree murder charge] which, in fact, took place, and (b) he was misled by his counsel into believing that he could not receive a three-year mandatory minimum sentence which, in fact, he received — we…