Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

372 F.2d 944

Docket No. 23957.

Willard Broxson v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Feb. 2, 1967.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1967-02-02

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently May 1977

17 federal appellate · 1 state decisions

2 counsel of record

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“The threshold question, given the fact of a guilty plea, is whether the plea of guilty was voluntarily and understandingly made. Thus the sole question presented on this appeal is whether Broxson's allegations form such a contrary basis as to warrant reversal for a hearing on the question of whether the pleas of guilty were coerced. All of the other errors asserted occurred prior to the pleas and may not now form the basis for collateral relief until and unless the pleas of guilty are set aside.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Willard Broxson v. Louie L. Wainwright, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida

“* * * the plea, if voluntarily and understandingly made, is conclusive as to the defendant's guilt, admitting all the facts charged and waiving all non-jurisdictional defects in the prior proceedings against him.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Arthur Lee Hamilton v. State of Florida

Relies on David Busby v. William C. Holman, Warden, Kilby Prison

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1967-02-02

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Willard Broxson, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., James G. Mahorner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, Fla., for appellee.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and BELL and GOLDBERG, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

¶1

Broxson, a Florida state prisoner serving concurrent sentences entered on pleas of guilty to robbery and attempted robbery, was denied habeas corpus relief in the District Court. As we stated in Busby v. Holman, 5 Cir., 1966, 356 F.2d 75, a plea of guilty, if voluntarily and understandingly made, is conclusive as to the defendant's guilt, admitting all of the facts charged and waiving all nonjurisdictional defects in the prior proceedings against him. The threshold question, given the fact of a guilty plea, is whether the plea of guilty was voluntarily and understandingly made. Thus the sole question presented on this appeal is whether Broxson's allegations form such a contrary basis as to warrant reversal for a hearing on the question of whether the pleas of guilty were coerced. All of the other errors asserted occurred prior to the pleas and may not now form the basis for collateral relief until and unless the pleas of guilty are set aside.

¶2

We have carefully studied the application for writ of habeas corpus as well as the entire file and have reached the firm conclusion that the allegations, taken separately or in sum, fail to make out a basis for a hearing on the issue of coercion. The District Court did not err in denying the relief sought.

¶3

Affirmed.

/372/f2d/944 · .json · Public domain