People v. Crum CA5

DISCUSSION

Crum contends that the trial court abused its discretion in denying her motion to withdraw her no contest plea, claiming she was under the influence of many medications and therefore her plea was not voluntary and intelligent. She also contends that the trial court erred in denying the motion because she provided clear and convincing evidence of newly discovered information which bolstered her defense to the charges, a defense she inadvertently and mistakenly did not consider under the circumstances. We disagree. Background Crum filed a motion to withdraw her no contest plea entered May 6, 2011. New counsel had been appointed for purposes of the motion. In the motion, Crum alleged she had been taking numerous medications at the time of the plea and had not understood the deal she was making or the rights she was giving up at the time. In addition, according to Crum, she had learned since the plea that some of the inmates at CCWF had been given the wrong medications, facts she claimed were similar to the facts that led to the criminal charges filed against her. Had she known this information at the time, she would not have entered the plea.

3. At the hearing on the…