GERARD ANTOINE, 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.
Appellant, an alien convicted of cocaine trafficking, appealed the denial of post-conviction relief, claiming his counsel was ineffective for failing to seek a judicial recommendation to prevent his deportation. The court affirmed the denial of relief because the deportation statute explicitly excludes drug offenders from eligibility for the recommendation that might prevent deportation.
Although counsel's failure to seek a § 1251(b) deportation prevention recommendation may constitute ineffective assistance under federal law, appellant cannot obtain relief in this case because he was convicted of a drug violation, and 8 U.S.C.A. § 1251(b) explicitly excludes drug offenders from its benefits.
[1] A lawyer's failure to seek a sentencing judge's recommendation to prevent deportation may constitute ineffective assistance of counsel.
[2] Federal law provides for deportation of aliens convicted of certain felonies involving moral turpitude, but allows for relief through a sentencing judge's recommendation.
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“an accused is entitled to adequate counsel through the sentencing phase of the proceedings against him and the failure to seek the prevention of deportation is the denial of an important right”
The court cited this principle from Janvier v. United States regarding the general duty of counsel concerning deportation prevention.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant was convicted after a jury trial of trafficking in cocaine. He is an alien who has resided in the United States less than five years. Upon 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 Felony Involving Moral Turpitude cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from an order denying post-conviction relief. Fla.R.Crim.P. 3.850.
Appellant alleges he was denied effective assistance of counsel and seeks to have the judgment and sentence vacated. His complaint against his lawyer involves a novel issue. He alleges that he was convicted after a jury trial of trafficking in cocaine, that he is an alien and that he may be deported from this country upon completion of his prison sentence. He says that his lawyer should have done certain things to assure that he will not be deported as a result of his conviction.
Under federal law, 8 U.S.C.A. § 1251(a)(4) (1970 and Supp.1989), any alien who has resided in our country less than five years, is convicted of a felony involving moral turpitude and is sentenced to prison for a year or more, may be deported. However, if he obtains relief through 8 U.S.C.A. § 1251(b) the deportation will not occur. That statute permits the sentencing judge to prevent deportation by his recommendation to the United States Attorney General that no deportation occur, if the recommendation-is made at sentencing or within thirty days thereafter. Appellant says the failure of his lawyer to seek the recommendation of the sentencing judge caused no recommendation to be made and will result in his deportation.
The trial judge denied the motion for collateral relief on the basis that the failure to assist in prevention of deportation is not a denial of effective assistance of counsel in Florida. The judge analogized this case to State v. Ginebra, 511 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 1987) which held that a lawyer’s failure to advise his client that a guilty plea may subject him to deportation was not such ineffective assistance of counsel to permit collateral attack. There is a federal case, also cited by the judge below, directly on point which holds that failure to seek a section 1251(b) recommendation is a denial of effective assistance of counsel. Janvier v. United States, 793 F. 2d 449 (2nd Cir. 1986). Janvier holds that an accused is entitled to adequate counsel through the sentencing phase of the proceedings against him and the failure to seek the prevention of deportation is the denial of an important right.
We cannot answer the question or afford any relief to appellant here because he was convicted of trafficking in cocaine and by the very terms of 8 U.S.C.A. § 1251(b) he is excluded from its benefits. That statute says that its provisions do not apply to persons charged with being deportable under 8 U.S.C.A. § 1251(a)(ll), those convicted of drug violations.
AFFIRMED.
DANIEL, C.J., and GOSHORN, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mevoine Bruce Dugart v. State, 578 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…right to effective assistance of counsel applies. Janvier v. United States, 793 F. 2d 449 (2d Cir.1986). Accordingly, the failure of the defendant’s attorney to move for a JRAD may constitute ineffective assistance of counsel. See Antoine v. State, 549 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). The facts alleged support the defendant’s claims of trial court error and ineffective assistance of counsel and form a sufficient application for writ of error coram nobis. If the alleged facts had been known to the trial court…
-
Port Everglades Auth. v. Honorable Robert Lance Andrews, 603 So. 2d 118 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…may have prejudged the case. This allegation, together with petitioner’s supporting affidavits, sets forth a legally sufficient basis for recusal. Therefore, the trial judge should have granted petitioner’s motion for recusal. See Kasser v. Woodson, 549 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989); Irwin v. Marko, 417 So. 2d 1108 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of prohibition. PROHIBITION GRANTED. DELL, WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.…
-
Shapiro v. Davina Craig, 210 So. 3d 782 (Fla. 5th DCA 2017)…in contentious litigation ten years ago. We find that Shapiro’s allegations created a well-founded fear in his mind that he would not receive a trial by an impartial tribunal. See Livingston v. State, 441 So. 2d 1083 (Fla. 1983); Kasser v. Woodson, 549 So. 2d 802 (Fla. 5th DCA 1989). Therefore, we grant the petition for writ of prohibition. PETITION GRANTED. TORPY and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- State v. Ginebra, 511 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 1987)
- Lyonel Janvier v. United States, 793 F.2d 449 (2d Cir. 1986)