ANTHONY DE LOACH, 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.
De Loach appealed the summary denial of his motion to vacate a first-degree murder conviction, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to advise him about the element of premeditation. The court affirmed, holding that premeditation was not required because De Loach was charged with felony murder (during burglary or robbery), where the intent to commit the underlying felony supplies the premeditation element.
The court affirmed the summary denial of the motion to vacate. Because De Loach was charged with felony murder rather than traditional first-degree murder, premeditation was not an element the prosecution was required to prove, making any alleged failure to advise about premeditation irrelevant to an ineffective assistance claim.
[1] A conviction for first-degree felony murder does not require proof of premeditation or malice aforethought, as the intent to commit the underlying felony supplants these…
[2] A defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel based on a failure to advise about premeditation is irrelevant when the defendant was indicted for first-degree f…
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the commission of a homicide in conjunction with the intent to commit a felony supplants the premeditation or malice aforethought classically required in a first degree murder prosecution”
Establishes the core legal principle that felony murder does not require proof of premeditation, making De Loach's argument about lack of advice on premeditation irrelevant.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDe Loach was indicted for first-degree felony murder (in connection with burglary or robbery). He entered a negotiated guilty plea in exchange for a c…
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 First Degree Felony Murder cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendant appeals from a summary denial of his motion to vacate, made pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, his conviction of first degree murder. The contention advanced is that the trial court denied the defendant an evidentiary hearing so as to enable him to establish the ineffective assistance of his court-appointed counsel on the alleged ground that his counsel did not specifically advise him with respect to the element of premeditation in his prosecution for first degree murder. Having examined the record, we determine that the flaw in defendant’s argument is that he ignores the fact that he was indicted for first degree felony (burglary or robbery) murder. It is well established that the commission of a homicide in conjunction with the intent to commit a felony supplants the premeditation or malice aforethought classically required in a first degree murder prosecution. Fleming v. State, 374 So. 2d 954, 956 (Fla.1979); Adams v. State, 341 So. 2d 765 (Fla.1976), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 878, 98 S.Ct. 232, 54 L.Ed.2d 158 (1977). Since the state did not have the obligation to show premeditation, the fact that the defendant was not advised with respect to it is irrelevant.
Further examination of the plea colloquy demonstrates that: (1) the defendant’s guilt was established under his admitted version of the facts; (2) his negotiated plea to the first degree felony murder indictment was in exchange for a concurrent life sentence to run with the sentences imposed on the burglary and robbery counts; (3) his plea was freely and voluntarily made; and (4) his court-appointed counsel was satisfied with the plea.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gurganus v. State, 451 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1984)…, 434 U.S. 878, 98 S.Ct. 232, 54 L.Ed.2d 158 (1977). This is also true for attempted first-degree felony murder. The state needs to prove that the accused did intend to commit the felony. Robles v. State, 188 So. 2d 789 (Fla.1966); DeLoach v. State, 388 So. 2d 31 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). The underlying felony in the present case was attempted kidnapping. In order to convict on attempted kidnapping the state must prove the attempted kidnapping was made with the specific intent to either: 1) hold for ransom or rewa…
-
Callaway v. Sec'y, Dep't of Corr. (Polk County) (M.D. Fla. 2023)
Authorities Cited
- Adams v. State, 341 So. 2d 765 (Fla. 1976)
- Middleton v. South Carolina, 434 U.S. 878 (U.S. 1977)
- Magda v. United States, 434 U.S. 878 (U.S. 1977)
- Myron David Fleming v. State, 374 So. 2d 954 (Fla. 1979)