ALVIN HOWARD, 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.
Alvin Howard appeals the denial of his post-conviction motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, raising seven ineffective assistance of counsel claims. The appellate court affirmed the denial of five claims but reversed the denial of two claims regarding the attempted burglary instruction and counsel's concession of guilt without consent.
The court reversed the denial of both claims. The court held that the limited trial record did not adequately show whether counsel acquiesced, failed to object, or affirmatively requested the attempted burglary instruction, and whether the evidence actually supported only a completed burglary rather than an attempt. The court also held that a trial court cannot find counsel's concession of guilt to be tactical without an evidentiary hearing.
[1] An instruction on a category two lesser included offense is permissible only if the language of the charging document and the evidence in the case support the charge.
[2] A trial court must attach portions of the record that conclusively demonstrate a defendant is not entitled to relief when summarily denying a postconviction claim.
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“Attempted burglary is not a necessarily lesser included offense of burglary of a structure or burglary. It is a category two lesser included offense.”
Establishes the legal classification of attempted burglary and the standards for jury instructions on lesser included offenses.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceHoward was charged with burglary of a dwelling but convicted of attempted burglary of a dwelling. He was sentenced to ten years in prison as a habitua…
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 Category Two Lesser Included Offense cases and more on FLexlaw
KELLY, Judge.
Alvin Howard appeals the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. Mr. Howard raised seven claims. We affirm the denial of claims one, two, three, six, and seven without discussion. We reverse the denial of claims four and five, which assert ineffective assistance of counsel.
Mr. Howard was charged with burglary of a dwelling and convicted of attempted burglary of a dwelling. He was sentenced to ten years in prison as a habitual felony offender and to a five-year mandatory minimum as a prison releasee reoffender. In his fourth claim, Mr. Howard asserted that he committed a completed burglary, and that there was no evidence of an attempted burglary. He claimed his counsel should not have acquiesced to the giving of an instruction on attempted burglary.
Attempted burglary is not a necessarily lesser included offense of burglary of a structure or burglary. It is a category two lesser included offense. See Standard Jury Instructions in Criminal Cases, 723 So. 2d 123 (Fla.1998). An instruction on a category two lesser included offense is permissible only if the language of the charging document and the evidence in the case support the charge. See State v. Johnson, 601 So. 2d 219, 220 (Fla.1992).
The limited record suggests that the evidence supported a completed burglary, not an attempt. Also because of the limited record, we cannot ascertain whether defense counsel acquiesced, failed to object, or perhaps affirmatively requested the instruction on attempted burglary. The record does not contain the information, the jury charge conferences, the actual jury instructions given, or the portions of trial testimony relevant to this claim.
Therefore, we reverse. On remand, if the trial court determines the claim should be summarily denied, it should attach portions of the record that demonstrate conclusively that Mr. Howard is not entitled to relief. See Armstrong v. State, 806 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
In his fifth claim, Mr. Howard asserted his defense counsel also was ineffec tive for conceding guilt to attempted burglary of a dwelling in closing argument, and for doing so without his specific consent. A concession of guilt to a lesser charge can at times be good strategy and within defense counsel’s discretion. See Atwater v. State, 788 So. 2d 223, 230-231 (Fla.2001). A trial court’s finding that some action or inaction by defense counsel was tactical is generally inappropriate without an evidentiary hearing. See Flores v. State, 662 So. 2d 1350, 1351 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). Under the circumstances present here, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing on this claim.
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
NORTHCUTT and STRINGER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Pereira v. State, 29 So. 3d 1186 (Fla. 5th DCA 2010)…rand theft of a dwelling to be included in the jury instructions, on remand the trial court must determine whether it was a strategic decision on the part of trial counsel to allow this lesser-included offense to go to the jury. See Howard v. State, 835 So. 2d 281, 283 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)(stating: “a trial court’s finding that some action or inaction by defense counsel was tactical is generally inappropriate without evidentiary hearing.”). See also Mallard v. State, 17 So. 3d 1285 (Fla. [*1189] 4th DCA 2009);…
Authorities Cited
- Atwater v. State, 788 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 2001)
- STANDARD JURY INSTRUCTIONS IN CRIM. CASES (97-2), 723 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 1998)
- Flores v. State, 662 So. 2d 1350 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)
- State v. Sinclair Johnson, 601 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 1992)
- Armstrong v. State, 806 So. 2d 547 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)