DAMION J. GREEN, 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 Fourth District affirmed the summary denial of Green's rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief, holding that his ineffective assistance claim was legally insufficient because he failed to allege with particularity the nature of his assistance to the State and the State's agreement to recommend mitigation.
A post-conviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel at sentencing must detail with sufficient particularity the nature of assistance provided to the State and the State's agreement to recommend mitigation.
[1] A post-conviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel must allege with sufficient particularity the facts supporting the claim, including the nature of assi…
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 intelligenceDamion J. Green appealed the summary denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief, claiming trial counsel was ineffective at sentencing …
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 Mitigation Of Sentence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Damion J. Green appeals the summary denial of his rule 3.850 motion for post-conviction relief. Appellant alleges that trial counsel was ineffective at the sentencing hearing in lower court case 05-304 for failing to present evidence of substantial assistance and the State’s offer to mitigate his sentence. The trial court denied appellant’s rule 3.850 motion as legally insufficient, and attached the plea form from lower court cases 01-13439, 01-4570 and 04-8826 to refute the claim. The trial court stated that appellant entered into guilty pleas in these cases and received an agreed upon sentence for each case. We affirm.
Appellant’s motion for post-conviction relief does not detail with sufficient particularity the ineffectiveness claim. Appellant should have explained the nature of the assistance he provided to the State and that the State agreed that his assistance was sufficient to warrant a recommendation for mitigation. Otherwise, the court would have no ground to mitigate his sentence for assistance to the State. Further, the fact that he alleges that the State offered mitigation suggests that the offer was in connection with the drug offenses, not the fleeing and eluding charges. See, e.g., § 893.135(4), Fla. Stat. Affirmed.
STONE, WARNER and SHAHOOD, JJ., concur.