TERRY ROBINSON, 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.
Terry Robinson appealed the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, raising multiple claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. The court reversed in part and remanded, finding that two specific claims—regarding the prosecutor's improper credibility statement about police officers and the sentencing court's alleged reliance on findings of perjury—warranted an evidentiary hearing rather than summary denial.
The court held that the trial court erred in summarily denying both claims without an evidentiary hearing. Ineffective assistance of counsel claims must be addressed through evidentiary hearings rather than summary denial, and a trial judge's opinion regarding whether a defendant testified falsely should not influence sentencing absent a separate perjury conviction. The case was remanded for an evidentiary hearing or record attachment.
[1] A prosecutor may not argue that a police officer's testimony should be believed solely because the officer is a police officer or because they have too much to lose by ly…
[2] Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel are properly raised by motion pursuant to Rule 3.850, not by direct appeal.
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“A prosecutor may not properly argue that a police officer's testimony should be believed simply because he or she is a police officer or that police officers would not testify falsely because they have too much at stake and would not risk their jobs.”
Establishes the legal standard prohibiting the prosecutor's credibility argument and supports reversal of the summary denial on this claim.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRobinson was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to sell. During closing argument, the prosecutor argued that veteran police officers would…
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
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, Terry Robinson, appeals the summary denial of his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Appellant raises numerous grounds in his motion. Apart from the two grounds discussed below, we conclude that appellant’s motion was appropriate for summary denial. We affirm in part and reverse in part.
Appellant was convicted of possession of cocaine with intent to sell. Appellant asserts that he was denied effective assistance because defense counsel failed to object to the following statement made by the prosecutor during closing argument:
These veterans of the Jacksonville Police Office, 20 years plus in Detective Lingen-felter’s case I submit are not going to go up there, raise their hand and swear to tell the truth and lie. Why are they going to risk their lengthy careers with the Jacksonville Sheriffs Office on this one case? That they stumbled into actually?
Appellant asserts that the trial boiled down to the credibility of witnesses and that the prosecutor’s comment on the credibility of the police officers’ testimony contributed to his guilty verdict. A prosecutor may not properly argue that a police officer’s testimony should be believed simply because he or she is a police officer or that police officers would not testify falsely because they have too much at stake and would not risk their jobs. Clark v. State, 632 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994).
The trial court summarily denied appellant’s claim based on a finding that defendant’s claim involved an evidentiary matter which should have been raised on direct appeal. It is well-settled that ineffective assistance of counsel claims are properly raised by motion pursuant to Rule 3.850, rather than direct appeal. Wooden v. State, 589 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
The trial court further found that even if the court accepted appellant’s allegations as true, appellant may not prevail because appellant’s allegations involve matters within the judgment and strategy of trial counsel. The trial court cites Gonzalez v. State, 579 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). Gonzalez involved a trial court’s ruling after an evidentiary hearing on allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. Although defense counsel is entitled to broad discretion regarding trial strategy, when a court is confronted with a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a finding that some action or inaction by defense counsel was tactical is generally inappropriate without an evidentiary hearing. Thomas v. State, 634 So. 2d 1157 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Gordon v. State, 608 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Davis v. State, 608 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Harley v. State, 594 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Dauer v. State, 570 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990).
Appellant further asserts that the trial court improperly imposed the maximum penalty of 30 years under the habitual offender statute based, in part, on the prosecutor’s statement that appellant committed perjury during trial. The trial court found appellant’s claim lacked merit, but did not attach portions of the record substantiating its findings. A trial judge’s opinion as to whether a defendant testified falsely should not enter into a decision to impose a harsher sentence unless the court is determining the sentence after a separate perjury conviction. City of Daytona Beach v. Del Percio, 476 So. 2d 197 (Fla.1985); Hubler v. State, 458 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).
Since the record before us fails to show that appellant is entitled to no relief on these claims, we reverse for an evidentiary hearing or for attachment of portions of the record demonstrating that appellant is entitled to no relief. We affirm as to all other grounds rejected in the trial court’s order. AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED in part and REMANDED with instructions.
MINER, WEBSTER and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Williams v. State, 673 So. 2d 974 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…argument was overruled, and motion for mistrial was denied. An attempt by the prosecuting attorney to bolster the credibility of police officers testifying in the case is improper argument entitling the defendant to a new trial. Robinson v. State, 637 So. 2d 998 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Clark v. State, 632 So. 2d 88, 91 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994). Prior to the portion of the state’s argument above quoted, the prosecutor had stressed the lack of credibility of the defense witnesses, and expressed the opinion that “[w]h…
-
Williams v. State, 872 So. 2d 396 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…e right to first and last closing arguments, and subjected appellant to cross-examination. “[A] finding that some action or inaction by defense counsel was tactical is generally inappropriate without an evidentiary hearing.” E.g., Robinson v. State, 637 So. 2d 998, 999 (Fla. 1st DCA. 1994) (citations omitted). Moreover, we note that the trial court’s assumption that simply displaying appellant’s tattoos to the jury would have forfeited first and last closing arguments and subjected appellant to cross-examinat…
-
Carswell v. State, 75 So. 3d 419 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…At the sentencing hearing, the trial court improperly considered its own opinion that Appellant “lied under oath in [his] defense.... ” Accordingly, we reverse the sentence and remand for resentencing before a different judge. See Robinson v. State, 637 So. 2d 998, 999 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (holding: “A trial judge’s opinion as to whether a defendant testified falsely should not enter into a decision to impose a harsher sentence unless the court is determining the sentence after a separate perjury conviction.”)…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (12 total)
- City OF Daytona Beach v. Del Percio, 476 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 1985)
- Hubler v. State, 458 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Dauer v. State, 570 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990)
- Gentile-Youd v. In re Guardianship OF Harriet Rudnick, 632 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Gonzalez v. State, 579 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Harley v. State, 594 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Davis v. State, 608 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992)
- Wooden v. State, 589 So. 2d 372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Shoffner v. Shoffner, 608 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
- Gordon v. State, 608 So. 2d 925 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)