Pinkins v. Wainwright
Pinkins v. Wainwright
Opinion of the Court
Pinkins’ contention that he did not know of his right to appeal and was deprived of appellate review through state action is shown by the record. The trial judge failed to advise Pinkins of his right to appeal, as required by Rule 3.670, CrPR, 33 F.S.A. What the transcript does show, however, is “that the trial judge carefully and with respect for Pinkins’ rights determined that his guilty plea was voluntary. Accordingly, we must determine that he is entitled to delayed appeal under Baggett v. Wainwright, Fla.1969, 229 So.2d 239 but
Habeas corpus granted; appeal allowed; rule to show cause why appeal should not be summarily dismissed issued.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.