ROBERT D. KORNAGAY, 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 court affirmed the trial court's denial of two ineffective assistance of counsel claims but reversed and remanded five claims that were summarily denied without proper consideration of the record.
A trial court may not summarily deny facially sufficient Rule 3.850 ineffective assistance of counsel claims without attaching record portions that conclusively refute them or conducting an evidentiary hearing.
[1] A trial court must either attach portions of the record conclusively refuting facially sufficient Rule 3.850 ineffective assistance of counsel claims or conduct an eviden…
[2] Claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel are not cognizable in Rule 3.850 post-conviction motions and must instead be raised in habeas corpus petitions.
Previewing 2 of 2 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“claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel are not cognizable in postconviction motions, and should be raised in a habeas petition”
Court explaining that appellate counsel ineffectiveness claims must be raised in habeas petitions, not Rule 3.850 motions
Kornagay filed a post-conviction motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850 alleging ineffective assistance of counsel on seven grounds. Th…
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 Ineffective Assistance Of Trial Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
Robert D. Kornagay, Appellant, challenges the trial court’s denial of his post-conviction motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. The trial court’s denial of claims III and V was proper. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s denial of these claims.
The trial court’s summary denial of claims I, II, IV, VI, and VII was improper. Appellant sufficiently alleged that he is entitled to postconviction relief on these grounds. The State correctly concedes that the trial court improperly relied on its response to Appellant’s postconviction motion in summarily denying Appellant’s facially sufficient claims on grounds I, II, IV, and VI. Additionally, in ground I, Appellant argues that both his trial and appellate counsel were ineffective. His claim against appellate counsel is not cognizable in a Rule 8.850 motion. Griffin v. State, 866 So.2d 1, 21 (Fla.2003) (holding that “claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel are not cognizable in postcon-viction motions, and should be raised in a habeas petition”). Consequently, we do not consider his claim against appellate counsel here. Regarding his remaining claims in grounds I, II, IV, VI, and VII, we reverse and remand for the trial court to either attach portions of the record conclusively refuting these claims or for an evidentiary hearing. See Foster v. State, 993 So.2d 97, 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008).
AFFIRMED in part, and REVERSED and REMANDED in part, with directions.
WEBSTER, LEWIS, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Griffin v. State, 866 So. 2d 1 (Fla. 2003)
- Berry v. State, 993 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
- Lehman Coy Foster v. State, 993 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)