WILLIAM FLOYD GAY, 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.
William Gay appealed the summary dismissal of two claims in a Rule 3.850 post-conviction relief motion, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The First District Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal of one claim regarding withdrawal of a jury instruction objection but reversed and remanded the other claim regarding alleged counsel misadvice about prior conviction impeachment.
The court affirmed the summary dismissal of the jury instruction withdrawal claim because the record conclusively showed this constituted reasonable trial strategy. The court reversed and remanded the testifying right claim because the record did not conclusively rebut Gay's specific assertion that counsel misadvised him about automatic disclosure of prior conviction details.
[1] A trial court may summarily dismiss a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel if the record conclusively shows that the withdrawal of an objection constituted reasonab…
[2] A defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel based on counsel's interference with the right to testify must show both deficient performance and prejudice.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“If the defendant admits the number of prior convictions, the prosecutor is not permitted to ask further questions regarding prior convictions, nor question the defendant as to the nature of the crimes. If, however, the defendant denies a conviction, the prosecutor can impeach him by introducing a certified record of the conviction.”
Establishes the legal rule governing cross-examination about prior convictions, which is central to Gay's claim that counsel misinformed him.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGay was convicted in trial. Defense counsel withdrew an objection to a special jury instruction. Gay did not testify at trial, but claimed counsel mis…
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 Reasonable Trial Strategy cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant Gay appeals the summary dismissal of two claims advanced in a Rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief. We affirm the summary dismissal of one of the claims, but reverse and remand the other for further proceedings.
Gay first argues he received ineffective assistance when defense counsel withdrew an objection to a special jury instruction. The trial court found the record conclusively showed that withdrawal of the objection constituted reasonable trial strategy. Accordingly, the trial judge summarily dismissed the claim. We agree and affirm the summary dismissal of this claim.
Gay next argues the trial court erred when it summarily dismissed his claim that counsel interfered with his right to testify. The trial judge attached portions of the record that showed Gay affirmatively chose not to testify. Gay claims, however, that counsel misadvised him that the jury would hear the nature of his prior convictions if he took the stand in his own defense. See Gavins v. State, 587 So. 2d 487, 489 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (“If the defendant admits the number of prior convictions, the prosecutor is not permitted to ask further questions regarding prior convictions, nor question the defendant as to the nature of the crimes. If, however, the defendant denies a conviction, the prosecutor can impeach him by introducing a certified record of the conviction.”); see also Tyler v. State, 793 So. 2d 137, 141 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (“Where counsel incorrectly informs a defendant regarding the use of prior convictions as impeachment, specifically, that upon testifying the jury will hear the specific nature of the prior convictions, and the defendant shows that because of the misinformation he did not testify, he has satisfied the deficient performance prong of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim.”).
In particular, we note Gay’s quite specific assertion in his motion, “Counsel advised Defendant that if he took the stand the jury would automatically learn of the violent details of his prior conviction.” Gay also argues that this deficient performance of counsel prejudiced his defense. See Oisorio v. State, 676 So. 2d 1363, 1364-65 (Fla.1996) (“[I]n order to obtain postconviction relief, a defendant claiming his or her right to testify was violated must show that counsel’s performance was deficient and that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.”).
The attached portions of the record do not conclusively rebut this claim.
Accordingly, we reverse and remand this matter with instructions to the trial court to either hold an evidentiary hearing or to attach record portions conclusively refuting Gay’s assertion.
AFFIRMED in part, REVERSED and REMANDED in part.
KAHN, C.J., BARFIELD and ALLEN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dominique Kareal Hill v. State, 226 So. 3d 1085 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…stances, the trial court’s order of dismissal is reversed with regard to this claim and remanded with instructions for the trial court to either attach documents that conclusively refute the claim or conduct an evidentiary hearing. See Gay v. State, 936 So. 2d 723, 724-25 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). AFFIRMED in part, and REVERSED and REMANDED in part for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. ROBERTS, WETHERELL, and ROWE, JJ„ CONCUR.…
Authorities Cited
- Oisorio v. State, 676 So. 2d 1363 (Fla. 1996)
- Lambert Keith Gavins v. State, 587 So. 2d 487 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)
- Earon L. Tyler v. State, 793 So. 2d 137 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001)