CALVIN JONES, PETITIONER,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Vindictive Sentencing cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendant seeks habeas corpus relief on the basis of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. The defendant claims that appellate counsel failed to raise, and should have raised on appeal, that the sentence imposed by the trial court after the defendant violated his probation was vindictive. A review of both the original sentencing transcript placing the defendant on probation and the transcript regarding the subsequent probation violation hearing, however, conclusively refutes any claim of vindictive sentencing. Because appellate counsel cannot be faulted for failing to file a meritless claim, we deny the petition. See Henyard v. State, 883 So.2d 753, 764 (Fla.2004); Rutherford v. Moore, 774 So.2d 637, 643 (Fla.2000) (holding that “[i]f a legal issue ‘would in all probability have been found to be without merit’ had counsel raised the issue on direct appeal, the failure of appellate counsel to raise the meritless issue will not render appellate counsel’s performance ineffective”).
Petition denied.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Kopel v. Bernardo Kopel, 229 So. 3d 812 (Fla. 2017)…The determination of whether an amended complaint relates back to the filing of the original complaint is a question of law, also reviewed de novo. Caduceus Properties, LLC v. Graney, 137 So. 3d 987, 991 (Fla. 2014); Flores v. Riscomp Indus., Inc., 35 So. 3d 146, 148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010). An amended complaint raising claims for which the' statute of limitations has expired can survive a motion to dismiss if the claims relate back to the timely filed initial pleading. Flores, 35 So. 3d at 147. Thus, the confli…
-
Armiger v. Associated Outdoor Clubs, Inc., 48 So. 3d 864 (Fla. 2d DCA 2010)…the “conduct, transaction, or occurrence” alleged in an earlier pleading that was timely filed, the expiration of the statute of limitations in the interim will not bar the claims asserted in the amended pleading. See Flores v. Riscomp Indus., Inc., 35 So. 3d 146, 147 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (“To survive a motion to dismiss after the statute of limitations has passed, an amended complaint must relate back to the original pleading made before the expiration of the statute of limitations.”). This court has stated…
-
Caduceus Props., LLC v. Graney, 137 So. 3d 987 (Fla. 2014)…So. 3d 893, 894-95 (Fla. 5th DCA 2012) (explaining that the relation-back rule is to be liberally interpreted and acknowledging that the underlying “rationale for this rule is grounded in the notion of fair notice”); Flores v. Riscomp Indus., Inc., 35 So. 3d 146, 148 (Fla. 3d DCA 2010) (explaining that the relation-back doctrine is to be liberally applied and articulating “the test to be whether ‘the original pleading gives fair notice of the general fact situation out of which the claim or defense arises’…
Previewing 3 of 16 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Rutherford v. Moore, 774 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 2000)
- Henyard v. State, 883 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 2004)