JOE LEWIS JENKINS, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT
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.
Jenkins sought post-conviction relief for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, claiming his appellate lawyer failed to raise fundamental error issues regarding jury instructions on lesser-included offenses. The court agreed, finding counsel was ineffective for failing to raise two facially meritorious claims about jury instructions relating to manslaughter as a lesser-included offense, and granted the petition by ordering a new appeal.
Yes. Appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to identify and present both claims, as they were facially meritorious claims of fundamental error supported by applicable case law that was available at the time of the initial appeal.
[1] Appellate counsel is ineffective for failing to raise a facially meritorious claim of fundamental error in jury instructions.
[2] The omission of an instruction on manslaughter by act, when culpable negligence is the only theory presented, constitutes fundamental error.
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“Although it is not a decision of this court, Bolin v. State, 8 So.3d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), supports the proposition that this omission amounted to fundamental error, and although Bolin was available to appellate counsel, this argument was not presented on appeal.”
Establishes the first basis for finding ineffective assistance—appellate counsel's failure to raise an available, meritorious claim about the omitted manslaughter instruction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFollowing a jury trial, Jenkins was convicted of second-degree murder and attempted second-degree murder. The trial court instructed the jury on mansl…
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 Manslaughter By Act cases and more on FLexlaw
By timely petition, Joe Lewis Jenkins presents a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Following a jury trial, Jenkins was convicted of one count of second-degree murder and one count of attempted second-degree murder. We found no merit to appellate counsel’s argument that the evidence was insufficient and affirmed Jenkins’ convictions without comment in Jenkins v. State, 60 So.3d 1057 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). Jenkins now asserts that his appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to identify and pursue two facially meritorious claims of fundamental error in the jury instructions. We agree that appellate counsel was ineffective in that regard, and therefore grant the petition.
The first issue identified by petitioner concerns the jury instruction relating to manslaughter as a lesser included offense of the charge of second-degree murder. For reasons not clear from the record available to us, the trial court instructed the jury solely on manslaughter by culpable negligence, and omitted any instruction on the alternate theory of manslaughter by act. Although it is not a decision of this court, Bolin v. State, 8 So.3d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009), supports the proposition that this omission amounted to fundamental error, and although Bo-lin was available to appellate counsel, this argument was not presented on appeal.
Secondly, Jenkins points out that in instructing the jury on attempted manslaughter as a lesser included offense of the attempted second-degree murder charge, the trial court did instruct on the theory on manslaughter by act, but the *1290instruction suffered from the same infirmities as the instruction in State v. Montgomery, 39 So.3d 252 (Fla.2010), approving, Montgomery v. State, 70 So.3d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). Lamb v. State, 18 So.3d 734 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009), supports the proposition that this too was fundamental error. We acknowledge that there is an as yet unresolved split of authority among the district courts of appeal on the question of whether an error of the sort identified in Montgomery is fundamental when the instruction relates to attempted manslaughter. See Davis v. State, 69 So.3d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011), and cases cited therein. Nonetheless, the existence of Lamb, which likewise was available to appellate counsel, yields the conclusion that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to present this issue.
Accordingly, the petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel is granted. Under the circumstances of this case, we conclude that the proper remedy is to order a new appeal. See King v. State, 15 So.3d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). Upon issuance of mandate, a copy of this opinion shall be furnished to the clerk of the lower tribunal for treatment as a notice of appeal directed to petitioner’s judgment and sentence in Escambia County Circuit Court case number 2008-CF-004267-A. If petitioner qualifies for the appointment of counsel at public expense, the lower tribunal is directed to appoint counsel to represent him on appeal. The new appellate proceeding authorized by this opinion shall be limited to the two issues identified above.
WOLF, HAWKES, and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Reuben Alexis v. State, 112 So. 3d 144 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…zelere were met, which undermines our confidence in the correctness of the result in the prior appeal. See Johnson v. Wainwright, 463 So. 2d 207, 209 (Fla.1985). Accordingly, the petition is granted and a new appeal is ordered. See Jenkins v. State, 75 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). As in Jenkins, upon issuance of mandate, a copy of this opinion shall be furnished to the clerk of the lower tribunal for treatment as a notice of appeal directed to Alexis’ judgment and sentence in Leon County Circuit Court ca…
-
Tywann O. Carter v. State, 98 So. 3d 1272 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…ent and sentence in Escambia County Circuit Court case number 2008-CF-004267-A. If petitioner qualifies for the appointment of counsel at public expense, the lower tribunal is directed to appoint counsel to represent him on appeal. Jenkins v. State, 75 So. 3d 1288, 1290 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). The two issues on appeal shall be limited to the same two issues authorized in Jenkins. See Id. CLARK, MARSTILLER, and MAKAR, JJ., concur.…
-
Reilly v. State, 102 So. 3d 680 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)…s Nelson hearing motion, he ultimately moved to represent himself. This court concludes that Reilly’s appellate attorney was ineffective for the failure to raise this issue. The petition is granted and a new appeal is ordered. See Jenkins v. State, 75 So. 3d 1288 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). As in Jenkins, upon issuance of mandate, a copy of this opinion shall be furnished to the clerk of the lower tribunal for treatment as a notice of appeal directed to petitioner’s judgment and sentence in Leon County Circuit Cour…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Montgomery, 39 So. 3d 252 (Fla. 2010)
- Montgomery v. State, 70 So. 3d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Lamb v. State, 18 So. 3d 734 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Bolin v. State, 8 So. 3d 428 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)
- Lamont Clifford King v. State, 15 So. 3d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Kawuan L. Davis v. State, 69 So. 3d 1021 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011)