STEPHON W. BOYKIN, A/K/A STEPHON W. BOYKINS, A/K/A STEPHON H. BOYKINS, A/K/A MICHAEL WILLIAMS, A/K/A STEPHAN GREENE, A/K/A CARL WILLIAMS, 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.
The court held that the trial court erred in denying the defendant's postconviction claim as procedurally barred, finding the claim facially sufficient for relief.
The defendant appealed the denial of his postconviction motion, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to file an adequate motion for …
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 Procedural Bar cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Stephon Boykin appeals the denial of his posteonviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. His motion attacks his 1992 conviction for armed robbery and alleges two instances of ineffective assistance of counsel. Upon one of these, we reverse.
Boykin alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file an adequate motion for judgment of acquittal at the close of the State’s case. In particular, he alleges that the evidence was insufficient to establish that he actually possessed a firearm during the commission of the robbery. He maintains that had his counsel made a motion which did not rely on boilerplate language, but instead articulated the specific shortcomings of the State’s case, he would have been acquitted on that charge. Boykin sets forth facts in support of his claim which closely resemble those in Butler v. State, 602 So. 2d 1303 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). These facts suggest that Boykin may very well have prevailed on a more artfully presented motion for acquittal based upon the evidence he alleges was presented against him at trial.
The trial court denied this claim, stating that Boykin was attempting to raise in a postconviction motion matters that should have been raised on a direct appeal in contravention of Montana v. State, 597 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). It appears the trial court misunderstood that Boykin was required to argue the sufficiency of the evidence in his motion in order to establish he had suffered prejudice from counsel’s alleged deficiency. Rather than attempting to rehash grounds that should have been dealt with on appeal, Boykin sets forth a facially sufficient claim for postconviction relief. We otherwise affirm the order of denial without discussion.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and WHATLEY and CASANUEVA, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Stephon Boykins v. State, 976 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)…d a rule 3.850 motion which the postconviction court denied. On appeal, this court affirmed in part and reversed in part, concluding that the postconviction court erred in denying one of Boykins’ claims as facially insufficient. See Boykin v. State, 725 So. 2d 1203, 1203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). On remand in 1999, the postconviction court allowed Boykins to enter a new guilty plea to the robbery charge in exchange for a [*701] sentence of twenty years’ imprisonment with a three-year minimum mandatory. Boykins file…
-
Jamil White v. State, 977 So. 2d 680 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)…show that ‘[he] may very well have prevailed on a more artfully presented motion for acquittal based upon the evidence he alleges was presented against him at trial.’ ” Neal v. State, 854 So. 2d 666, 670 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003) (quoting Boykin v. State, 725 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999)). In this case, it is clear that a proper motion preserving the issue for appeal would have resulted in relief, given that the co-defendant prevailed on appeal. See Terry, 892 So. 2d at 1133. On this issue, counsel did not make a…
-
Neal v. State, 854 So. 2d 666 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…r of a law enforcement officer. A claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to preserve a sufficiency of the evidence claim for appeal by way of an adequate motion for judgment of acquittal is a cognizable rule 3.850 claim. See Boykin v. State, 725 So. 2d 1203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). Boykin holds that to properly allege such a claim, a movant should state sufficient facts to show that “[he] may very well have prevailed on a more artfully presented motion for acquittal based upon the evidence he alleges was pr…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Butler v. State, 602 So. 2d 1303 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)
- Montana v. State, 597 So. 2d 334 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)