AUTAVIOUS M. CAPERS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE 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 held that the defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to file a timely appeal was properly denied as there was insufficient evidence that the defendant requested an appeal.
The defendant filed a motion for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to interview alibi witnesses and for f…
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 Florida Rule Of Appellate Procedure 9.141(C) cases and more on FLexlaw
Autavious M. Capers appeals an order summarily denying a motion under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In Caper’s 8.850 motion, he set forth two grounds for relief. First, he asserted that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to interview alibi witnesses. In our previous opinion regarding this matter, we agreed with the State that this claim is refuted by the record because Capers admitted his participation in the crimes during the plea colloquy and gave a proffer regarding his involvement in the crimes. As such, the trial court correctly summarily denied this claim. See Van Leer v. State, 983 So.2d 1228, 1229 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008).
In the second ground he sets forth, Capers alleged that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to file a timely notice of appeal. The trial court found that the right to an appeal was waived through the plea colloquy and summarily denied the claim.
We treated this request as a petition seeking a belated appeal. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(c). Because there appeared to be an actual dispute as to whether Capers made a timely request of his counsel to file an appeal, we relinquished jurisdiction to the division judge to act as a Commissioner of this Court to conduct an evidentiary hearing to take testimony from Capers and Caper’s counsel and make a factual finding as to whether Capers made a timely request of his counsel to file an appeal. See State v. Trowell, 739 So.2d 77, 81 (Fla.1999); Walker v. State, 742 So.2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999).
The trial court, acting as a Commissioner for this Court, and having conducted the evidentiary hearing, found that there was insufficient evidence to conclude that Capers requested that his trial counsel file an appeal. Accordingly, we deny Caper’s petition for belated appeal.
Affirmed in part; denied in part.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Trowell, 739 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 1999)
- Walker v. State, 742 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- van Leer v. State, 983 So. 2d 1228 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008)