Schenck v. State
Docket: No. 95-2785
Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; November 7, 1995; Florida; State Appellate Court
Judge Pariente dissents regarding the defendant's motion for post-conviction relief in the case of Schenck v. State. The court previously reversed a summary denial of this motion, remanding for either an evidentiary hearing or record attachments to address claims of involuntary plea due to schizophrenia and psychotropic medication. The written plea agreement acknowledged the defendant's past mental health issues but claimed competence at the time of the plea, noting ongoing treatment for hallucinations. The dissent argues that the written plea agreement does not definitively negate the defendant's allegations, as its statements are described as "equivocal and contradictory." Upon remand, the trial court denied the motion for 3.850 relief, asserting that the transcript excerpts indicated the plea was entered competently. However, the dissenting judge contends that these excerpts do not conclusively prove the defendant's competence or address the concerns raised in the original opinion. Key transcript excerpts reveal that the defendant had expressed dissatisfaction with his attorney, was seeing a psychiatrist, and that the psychiatrist's report on competency was relayed through double hearsay without supporting evidence. At the plea hearing, the defense counsel stated the defendant felt his mental condition did not interfere with his understanding of the plea, despite the plea form indicating treatment for hallucinations. The trial court failed to inquire further about the defendant's medications or mental condition, leading to a plea colloquy characterized by minimal responses from the defendant. The dissent references prior case law, asserting that the trial court's lack of inquiry into the defendant's mental health and the contradictory information in the plea form necessitates a reversal for an evidentiary hearing to determine if the defendant's mental state and medications affected his ability to enter a voluntary plea.