JOHN A. KAMPFF, 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.
Trial court erred in denying post-conviction relief for ineffective assistance of counsel based on prior direct appeal attempt; the Supreme Court's affirmance of conviction without addressing the ineffective counsel claim does not bar collateral attack.
A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel may be raised for the first time in a post-conviction motion under Rule 3.850 even if erroneously attempted on direct appeal, provided the appellate court did not adjudicate the claim on the merits.
[1] A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel may be raised in a post-conviction motion under Rule 3.850 even if previously and erroneously attempted on direct appeal, pro…
Previewing 1 of 1 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 fact that appellant erroneously attempted to raise this claim on direct appeal to the Supreme Court is immaterial here.”
Court explaining why prior erroneous attempt on direct appeal does not bar collateral attack.
Appellant was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. He attempted to raise an ineffective assistance of counsel claim on direct appe…
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 Direct Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The trial court denied appellant’s motion for post conviction relief which alleged ineffective assistance of counsel in defendant’s first degree murder conviction. The court ruled that this issue had been previously raised on direct appeal to the Supreme Court, thus barring appellant from again presenting it by way of collateral attack. We reverse. As a general rule, a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be raised for the first time on direct appeal. Williams v. State, 438 So. 2d 781 (Fla.1983). The fact that appellant erroneously attempted to raise this claim on direct appeal to the Supreme Court is immaterial here. The Supreme Court affirmed appellant’s conviction but reversed his death sentence. Kampff v. State, 371 So. 2d 1007 (Fla.1979). The Court’s opinion does not comment specifically on the ineffective counsel argument, and the overall holding that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury’s verdict cannot be viewed as an adjudication on the merits of appellant’s claim of ineffective counsel. We remand the matter to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing on appellant’s motion filed pursuant to Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
BERANEK, HERSEY and DELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Corzo v. State, 806 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)…f ineffective assistance of counsel, an affirmance on direct appeal should rarely, if ever, be treated as a procedural bar to a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel on a post-conviction motion. See Bruno, 807 So. 2d at 64-65; Kampff v. State, 443 So. 2d 401, 402 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). We conclude that the trial court improperly denied Mr. Corzo’s postconvietion motion on the ground that the ineffective assistance of counsel issue was raised on direct appeal. Mr. Corzo’s postconviction motion is facially…
-
Brown v. State, 283 So. 3d 425 (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)…if ever, be treated as a procedural bar to a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel on a postconviction motion." Corzo v. State, 806 So. 2d 642, 645 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002) (first citing Bruno, 807 So. 2d at 64- 65; and then citing Kampff v. State, 443 So. 2d 401, 402 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)). Particularly where, as here, the claim asserts trial counsel's failure to object, the postconviction court should not have summarily denied it merely because an issue alleging a related error by the trial court was affir…
-
Blandin v. State, 128 So. 3d 235 (Fla. 2d DCA 2013)…ere not barred in postcon-viction by the doctrine of res judicata because the defendant’s conviction and sentence were affirmed without a written opinion expressly addressing the claims of [*237] ineffective assistance of counsel); Kam/pjf v. State, 443 So. 2d 401, 402 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984) (holding that the postconviction court erred in finding the ineffective assistance of counsel claim proeedurally barred because the court’s opinion did “not comment specifically on the ineffective counsel argument, and the o…
Authorities Cited
- Kampff v. State, 371 So. 2d 1007 (Fla. 1979)
- Williams v. State, 438 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1983)