HARLAN HILLENBRAND, 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 issue of whether counsel's admission of guilt was ineffective assistance, requiring an inquiry into the defendant's consent, is not properly raised on direct appeal.
During opening statements, the defendant's counsel admitted guilt to some charges while contesting others. The defendant appealed his convictions, arg…
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 Cognizable On Direct Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
SILBERMAN, Judge.
Harlan Hillenbrand appeals his convictions and argues that the trial court erred by not inquiring into whether he consented to his counsel’s admission of guilt during trial. Because the issue is not properly raised on direct appeal, we affirm.
During opening statements, Hillenb-rand’s counsel told the jury that Hillenb-rand was guilty of resisting arrest, battery on a law enforcement officer, and battery on police dogs, but that the evidence did not support the other charges of theft and attempted murder of a law enforcement officer. Hillenbrand argues, and the State concedes, that this case should be remanded for an evidentiary hearing under Nixon v. Singletary, 758 So. 2d 618 (Fla.2000), because the trial court did not inquire into Hillenbrand’s consent to the admission of guilt.
The issue before us actually appears to be the ineffective assistance of counsel because of counsel’s admission of guilt on behalf of Hillenbrand. Nixon, 758 So. 2d at 623. Ineffectiveness of counsel is an issue that is generally not cognizable on direct appeal. Lawrence v. State, 691 So. 2d 1068, 1074 (Fla.1997); Cowan v. State, 725 So. 2d 1153, 1154 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998). The issue is only reviewed on direct appeal if the ineffectiveness is apparent on the face of the record. Eure v. State, 764 So. 2d 798, 801 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000).
Whether Hillenbrand consented to the trial strategy of counsel in admitting guilt must be resolved in order to determine the issue of ineffectiveness of counsel. The trial court did not have the benefit of the decision in Nixon and did not conduct an inquiry to determine Hillenb-rand’s consent. See Nixon, 758 So. 2d at 623-24. Because an evidentiary hearing is required and the issue cannot be addressed on direct appeal, Hillenbrand has the right to seek relief by filing a timely motion pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850.
Affirmed.
THREADGILL, A.C.J., and SALCINES, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Adell Barnes v. State, 933 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…are not properly before this court. See Acord v. State, 841 So. 2d 587, 590 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Also, as the State points out, claims of ineffective assistance of counsel generally must be raised in a postconviction motion. See Hillenbrand v. State, 790 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Accordingly, we affirm without prejudice to Barnes’ right to seek postconviction relief in the trial court. NORTHCUTT, J., and GALLEN, THOMAS M., Associate Senior Judge, Concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Nixon v. Singletary, 758 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 2000)
- Lawrence v. State, 691 So. 2d 1068 (Fla. 1997)
- Eure v. State, 764 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000)
- G.S. v. State, 725 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)
- Cowan v. State, 725 So. 2d 1153 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)