NORMAN CAISON, 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's convictions for first-degree murder with a firearm, attempted second-degree murder with a firearm, and unlawful firearm possession were affirmed; his ineffective assistance of counsel claim was rejected as a collateral matter requiring post-conviction relief rather than direct appeal.
A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel cannot be raised for the first time on direct appeal unless the facts are apparent on the record's face, a conflict of interest is shown, or prejudice is demonstrated.
[1] A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel ordinarily cannot be raised for the first time on direct appeal but must be pursued through post-conviction relief under Flor…
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 intelligenceNorman Caison was convicted by jury of first-degree murder with a firearm, attempted second-degree murder with a firearm, and unlawful possession of a…
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 First Degree Murder With A Firearm cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Norman Caison appeals his convictions and sentences for first degree murder with a firearm, attempted second degree murder with a firearm and unlawful possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony after a jury trial.
His primary contention on this direct appeal is that he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel throughout the proceedings below. A claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, however, is a collateral matter which must generally be pursued for the first time in a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. See Blanco v. Wainwright, 507 So. 2d 1377 (Fla.1987); Gregory v. State 588 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). We have said that a claim of this nature may not be raised for the first time on direct appeal unless the facts giving rise to the claim are apparent on the face of the record, a conflict of interest is shown, or prejudice to the defendant is shown. Gregory, 588 So. 2d at 676 (citations omitted). We find that the facts giving rise to the appellant’s ineffective assistance claim are not readily apparent on the scant record before us. Accordingly, we cannot grant the requested relief. Our holding, however, is without prejudice to the appellant to pursue this claim in a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to rule 3.850.
As to the appellant’s remaining issues on this appeal, we find no reversible error. Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (64 total)
-
State v. Thompson, 750 So. 2d 643 (Fla. 1999)…95-182 violates the single subject rule contained in article III, section 6 of the Florida Constitution. See Thompson, 708 So. 2d at 317. In so holding, the Second District acknowledged conflict with the Third District’s decision in Higgs v. State, 695 So. 2d 872, 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997), wherein the court rejected a single subject rule challenge to section 95-182. We have jurisdiction. See Art. V, § 3(b)(1), (3), Fla. Const. As set forth more fully below, we agree with the Second District’s decision in Thomp…1 / 2
-
Thompson v. State, 708 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…wo subjects in one act violates article III, section 6, of the Florida Constitution; thus, we hold that chapter 95-182, Laws of Florida, is unconstitutional. In so holding, we acknowledge conflict with the Third District’s opinion in Higgs v. State, 695 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997). We reverse Thompson’s sentences and remand for resen-tencing in accordance with the valid laws in effect at the time of her sentencing on May 21, 1996. See Johnson, 616 So. 2d at 5.1 Reversed and remanded. BLUE and FULMER, JJ.,…
-
Heggs v. State, 718 So. 2d 263 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)…ing would have a wide-ranging effect: any defendant sentenced in this district between October 1, 1995 and May 24, 1997 might have an argument that his sentence should be reversed.1 Moreover, in Thompson we acknowledged conflict with Higgs v. State, 695 So. 2d 872 (Fla. 3d DCA [*265] 1997), in which the Third District declared that chapter 95-182 did not violate the single subject rule. We presume that the Third District would reach the same result if presented with a similar challenge to chapter 95-184. Thus…
Previewing 3 of 64 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Blanco v. Louie L. Wainwright, 507 So. 2d 1377 (Fla. 1987)
- Gregory v. State, 588 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)