Bowman v. State

Supreme Court of Florida
Bowman v. State, 286 So. 2d 9 (Fla. 1973)
Carlton, Dekle, Ervin, McCain, Roberts

Bowman v. State

Opinion of the Court

Certiorari denied. 281 So.2d 35.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur. ERVIN, J., dissents.

Dissenting Opinion

ERVIN, J.,

dissenting:

I believe we should treat the petition for writ of certiorari as one sounding in ha-beas corpus and require a return from the state. Where a plea of nolo contendere is substituted for a plea of not guilty the record should show if it was voluntary. See Boykin v. Alabama, 395 U.S. 238, 89 S.Ct. 1709, 23 L.Ed.2d 274. If the State’s return clearly shows the substituted plea was voluntary then the writ should be discharged. But if doubt exists an eviden-tiary hearing should be held.

Reference

Full Case Name
Sterling Curtis BOWMAN v. STATE of Florida
Status
Published