Opinion ID: 1940462
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Competent, Substantial Evidence Review

Text: This Court is obligated to review the record of a death penalty case to determine whether the evidence is sufficient to support the murder conviction. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.140(i); Davis v. State, 859 So.2d 465, 480 (Fla.2003). However, [w]hen a defendant has pled guilty to the charges resulting in a penalty of death, this Court's review shifts to the knowing, intelligent, and voluntary nature of that plea. Lynch v. State, 841 So.2d 362, 375 (Fla.2003); see Koenig v. State, 597 So.2d 256, 257 n. 2 (Fla.1992) (stating that where a death-sentenced defendant pled guilty, [i]n order to review the judgment of conviction ..., we must review the propriety of [the defendant's] plea, since it is the plea which formed the basis for his conviction). Proper review requires this Court to scrutinize the plea to ensure that the defendant was made aware of the consequences of his plea, was apprised of the constitutional rights he was waiving, and pled guilty voluntarily. Ocha v. State, 826 So.2d 956, 965 (Fla.2002). In this case, our review of the plea colloquy amply satisfies us that the trial court thoroughly informed appellant about the rights he was waiving and appellant indicated both verbally and in writing that he understood. Specifically, the court explained that appellant was entitled to a jury in both phases of the trial, that if he elected to waive his right to a jury, the judge alone would determine his sentence, and that the only sentencing options were life or death. Appellant stated that he understood the ramifications of his plea, that he was not being threatened or coerced, and that he was not on any medication that would impair his understanding of his decision. He does not contend otherwise in this appeal. Accordingly, we hold that he knowingly and voluntarily entered his plea, and the trial court properly accepted it.