RUSSELL C. BOWERS, 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.
Florida appellate court affirmed convictions for grand theft and burglary with consecutive sentences, finding no reversible error on direct appeal but preserving the defendant's right to raise ineffective assistance of counsel claims in postconviction proceedings.
Convictions for grand theft and burglary with consecutive sentences are affirmed, with ineffective assistance of counsel claims properly reserved for postconviction motion.
[1] Ineffective assistance of counsel claims not apparent from the face of the record are more appropriately raised in postconviction motions under Florida Rule of Criminal P…
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 intelligenceBowers was convicted of grand theft (theft exceeding $20,000) and burglary of an unoccupied structure, receiving consecutive sentences of fifteen and …
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 Anders Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
In this Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), appeal, Mr. Bowers challenges his convictions for grand theft, a second-degree felony requiring a theft of more than $20,000, see § 812.014(1), (2)(b), Fla. Stat. (2000); and burglary of an unoccupied structure, a third-degree felony, see § 812.02(4)(a), Fla. Stat. (2000); and his consecutive sentences of fifteen and five years’ imprisonment. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the only issue of arguable merit is whether Mr. Bowers’ trial counsel provided ineffective assistance in a manner that can be conclusively determined from the face of the record. See, e.g., Forget v. State, 782 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001).
Although we question trial counsel’s decision to elicit testimony from Mr. Bowers regarding the details of his prior convictions, we conclude that any claim of ineffective assistance of counsel is more appropriately raised in a postconviction motion filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We therefore affirm the judgments and sentences without prejudice to Mr. Bowers’ right to raise this issue in a properly filed motion for post-conviction relief, if appropriate.
ALTENBERND, C.J., and FULMER and WALLACE, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Bowers v. State, 929 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 2d DCA 2006)…rs’ trial counsel provided ineffective assistance in a manner that can be conclusively determined from the face of the record” and concluding that any ineffectiveness claims were “more appropriately raised in a [rule 3.850 motion].” Bowers v. State, 850 So. 2d 617, 617 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). Accordingly, Bowers alleged in his post-conviction motion that his trial counsel had rendered ineffective assistance by eliciting numerous details of Bowers’ prior criminal record during his direct examination of Bowers. Mo…
-
Williams v. State, 914 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed without prejudice to any right appellant may have to file a Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 motion raising a claim of scoresheet error, that is not apparent from the face of the scoresheet. See Daly v. State, 850 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003). POLEN, FARMER and GROSS, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Alain L. Forget v. State, 782 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)