RAYMOND ALONZO MIMS, 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.
Raymond Alonzo Mims appealed the denial of his post-conviction motion for ineffective assistance of counsel, claiming his defense attorney prevented him from testifying despite having potentially exculpatory alibi evidence. The court reversed in part, finding that the trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing or provide more conclusive evidence to deny the claim, as a criminal record alone cannot conclusively refute the allegation when alibi testimony is at issue.
The court held that the trial court's reliance solely on Mims' criminal record to deny the post-conviction motion was insufficient. The court reversed and remanded, directing the trial court to either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach further portions of the record that conclusively demonstrate Mims is entitled to no relief.
[1] A defendant's right to testify is a fundamental right that cannot be waived by counsel without the defendant's consent.
[2] A trial court must conduct an evidentiary hearing on a motion for post-conviction relief if the motion's allegations are not conclusively refuted by the record.
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“Mims' allegations were sufficient to require the trial court to attach portions of the record which refuted the claim, or to hold an evidentiary hearing.”
Establishes the legal standard for evaluating post-conviction ineffective assistance claims; trial courts must either provide conclusive record evidence or conduct a hearing.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMims was convicted of a crime and filed a post-conviction motion alleging his defense counsel failed to honor his desire to testify. Mims claimed that…
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 Alibi Testimony cases and more on FLexlaw
MICKLE, Judge.
Raymond Alonzo Mims appeals the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Of the two grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel raised, one has merit: defense counsel’s failure to honor Mims’ desire to testify. We reverse for further proceedings as to this issue only.
Mims alleged that, had he been allowed to testify, his alibi testimony would have corroborated the testimony of the sole defense eyewitness that Mims was not present at the scene of the crime. Without conducting an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied relief, concluding that defense counsel made a tactical decision that Mims should not testify given his extensive criminal record, and also that Mims had failed to demonstrate in his motion how the outcome of the trial would have been different but for the alleged ineffectiveness of counsel. Attached to the trial court’s order is a copy of what purports to be Mims’ criminal record.
Mims’ allegations were sufficient to require the trial court to attach portions of the record which refuted the claim, or to hold an evidentiary hearing. See Wilson v. State, 647 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Merritt v. State, 642 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994); Kersey v. State, 636 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Dukes v. State, 633 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Gill v. State, 632 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Williams v. State, 601 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Herein, the trial court attached a copy of Mims’ criminal record as conclusive refutation of the asserted claim for relief. While the existence of an extensive criminal record is unquestionably some indication of the soundness of defense counsel’s decision to withhold the testimony of Mims in this case, in view of the pivotal nature of the avowed alibi evidence, we believe something more than a criminal record alone was necessary to support the denial of Mims’ claim for relief.
Accordingly, because we conclude that the trial court’s attachments do not conclusively rebut Mims’ claim, we reverse and remand with directions that the trial court either conduct an evidentiary hearing or again deny the motion attaching further portions of the record conclusively demonstrating that Mims is entitled to no relief. In all other respects the trial court’s order denying the motion for post-conviction relief is affirmed. AFFIRMED in part; REVERSED in part; REMANDED.
WEBSTER and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vandenburgh v. State, 658 So. 2d 181 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)…by Rule 3.850, the trial court either conduct an evidentiary hearing or attach portions of the record conclusively demonstrating that Vandenburgh is entitled to no relief with respect to his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. Mims v. State, 656 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Wilson v. State, 647 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Gill v. State, 632 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994); Williams v. State, 601 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). In all other respects, the trial court’s order is affirmed. REVERSED…
-
Mims v. State, 672 So. 2d 662 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…tiary hearing. Havis v. State, 555 So. 2d 417 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989). The motion, in pertinent part, alleged ineffective assistance of counsel based on the trial attorney’s refusal to permit the appellant to testify in Ms own behalf. See Mims v. State, 656 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (finding the appellant’s other argument to be without merit, and reversing and remanding for an evidentiary hearing or attachments relating to the issue at hand). On remand, the trial court addressed counsel’s alleged failure to…
-
Wynn v. State, 674 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…dge [*853] appellant’s claims with that used in many-other cases, including Brown v. State, 596 So. 2d 1026 (Fla.1992) (factual allegations sufficient to state ineffective assistance claim based on failure to impeach trial witnesses); Mims v. State, 656 So. 2d 577 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995) (allegations that counsel failed to honor defendant’s desire to testify sufficient to state ineffective assistance claim); Wright v. State, 646 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994) (specificity of facts alleged sufficient to state inef…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wilson v. State, 647 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)
- Gill v. State, 632 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Williams v. State, 601 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Merritt v. State, 642 So. 2d 845 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
- Dennis v. The Honorable Leonard Rivkind, 633 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- Dukes v. State, 633 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)
- Kersey v. State, 636 So. 2d 789 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)