WILLIE DAN ROBERTS, APPELLANT,
v.
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 claims of ineffective assistance of counsel can be raised in a motion for post-conviction relief, while other claims should have been raised on direct appeal.
[1] Issues that could have been raised on direct appeal are procedurally barred from collateral review.
[2] Allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, particularly those concerning counsel's failure to file a motion to suppress, are generally cognizable in a motion for p…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRoberts appealed the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief, which challenged his convictions based on Sixth Amendment right to counsel, Four…
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 Illegally Seized Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Roberts appeals the lower court’s denial of his motion brought under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In his 3.850 motion, he challenged the adequacy of his prior convictions for sexual battery and burglary along with the concomitant judgments and sentences entered thereon contending (1) that he had been denied his Sixth Amendment right to counsel at a pretrial identification procedure; (2) that his Fourth Amendment rights had been violated, and (3) that the appellant had been denied effective assistance of counsel. The appellant had previously appealed his judgments and sentences in which we affirmed the lower court in a per curiam decision without opinion. Roberts v. State, No. NN-100 (Fla. 1st DCA, March 24, 1980) (opinion unpublished). The lower court in its order found all three points to be meritless without referring to any independent hearing conducted on these issues or without attaching any relevant portion of the record which would support its conclusions.
We affirm the trial court as to the first two grounds as those issues should have been raised on direct appeal. See Thomas v. State, 399 So. 2d 533 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981).
The third ground concerning the appellant’s denial of effective assistance of counsel could not be raised on direct appeal. See State v. Barber, 301 So. 2d 7 (Fla.1974). This allegation, pertaining primarily to the conduct of appellant’s counsel in failing to file a pretrial motion to suppress certain evidence which appellant alleged was illegally seized, was sufficiently detailed, as required by Knight v. State, 394 So. 2d 997, 1001 (Fla.1981).
Accordingly, the lower court’s order denying the appellant's 3.850 motion as to that ground is reversed and the cause is remanded for further action. On remand, the lower court shall either (a) attach any portion of the record which refutes the appellant’s allegation, or (b) conduct an evidentiary hearing. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850. See also Stephens v. State, 399 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 5th DCA, 1981).
MILLS, ERVIN and LARRY G. SMITH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Leamon Williams v. State, 418 So. 2d 1218 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…ion the trial court erroneously held that the claim of ineffective counsel could and should have been raised on Williams' direct appeal, in which this Court affirmed the conviction. See State v. Barber, 301 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1974) and Roberts v. State, 402 So. 2d 1343 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Yet the court properly denied the motion, both because it lacks specific allegations of the exonerating testimony Williams intimates his parents might have given and because the partial trial transcript exhibited with the motion…
Authorities Cited
- Knight v. State, 394 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 1981)
- State v. Barber, 301 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 1974)
- Stephens v. State, 399 So. 2d 1106 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)
- Thomas v. State, 399 So. 2d 533 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)