JAMES H. THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for post-conviction relief and affirmed the decision.
Appellant appealed the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief, which alleged ineffective assistance of counsel and denial of his right to par…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Trial Strategy cases and more on FLexlaw
James H. Thomas appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and the denial by the court of his right to participate as co-counsel. We find no error and affirm the decision of the trial court.
The issue of defendant’s right to participate as co-counsel was determined by this court to be without merit in Thomas v. State, 370 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). That issue was therefore improperly raised in a subsequent motion to vacate. Epps v. State, 365 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
Defendant’s allegation of ineffective assistance of the public defender is refuted by the record. Defense counsel testified that he had discussed the case and defense theories with defendant. The trial court resolved any issue of credibility against defendant. Plymale v. State, 201 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967). Defense counsel filed pre-trial motions, made objections during trial, cross-examined witnesses, argued a motion for judgment of acquittal, and requested specific jury instructions. Although defense counsel did not require defendant to testify, we find counsel’s conduct of the trial to be acceptable trial strategy upon consideration of the impeachment value of the defendant’s five prior felony convictions.
The decision of the trial court is therefore affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dominguez v. State, 386 So. 2d 63 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…petitioner is entitled to no relief; (2) that the issue raised on the petitioner’s Rule 3.850 motion was decided adversely to him on direct appeal, Dominguez v. State, 374 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), and may not be reconsidered. Thomas v. State, 383 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Affirmed.…
-
Suarez v. State, 502 So. 2d 526 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…ant’s constitutional right to present a defense by testifying in his own behalf was not, as urged, abridged in this case. See Cutter v. State, 460 So. 2d 538, 539 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984); Moore v. State, 458 So. 2d 61 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Thomas v. State, 383 So. 2d 261 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Plymale v. State, 201 So. 2d 85 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)
- Norris Epps v. State, 365 So. 2d 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
- Thomas v. State, 370 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)