Morales v. State

Full title: Rigoberto Morales, Appellant, v. The State of Florida, Appellee.

Court: Florida Court of Appeals, Third District

Date published: Nov 30, 2022

358 So. 3d 1254 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2022)

Opinion

No. 3D22-700.

11-30-2022

Rigoberto MORALES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Carlos J. Martinez , Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner , Assistant Public Defender, for appellant. Ashley Moody , Attorney General, and Katryna Santa Cruz , Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before LOGUE, SCALES and GORDO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Carlos J. Martinez , Public Defender, and Susan S. Lerner , Assistant Public Defender, for appellant.

Ashley Moody , Attorney General, and Katryna Santa Cruz , Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, SCALES and GORDO, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See LeDuc v. State, 415 So.2d 721, 722 (Fla. 1982) (finding that where a motion to withdraw a plea occurs after sentencing, the defendant has the burden of proving that a "manifest injustice has occurred"); Ingraham v. State, 248 So.3d 153, 154-55 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018) ("[T]he motion to withdraw plea must be more than a mere recitation of general allegations."); Powell v. State, 929 So.2d 54, 55 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006) ("[C]onclusory allegations are insufficient. Rather, a defendant must offer some proof that his plea was not voluntarily entered."); Saintlier v. State, 109 So.3d 303, 305 (Fla. 4th DCA 2013) (affirming a trial court's summary denial of a defendant's motion to withdraw a plea as the motion was "facially insufficient because the [defendant] did not set, forth any factual basis to support his conclusory allegations").