ERNEST SUGGS, APPELLANT(S)
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE(S)
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.
Ernest Suggs, a death row inmate, appealed the denial of his motion for appointment of registry counsel to represent him in successive postconviction relief proceedings. The Florida Supreme Court dismissed the appeal without prejudice, finding that his original trial counsel remained counsel of record and that the proper procedure required first obtaining that counsel's withdrawal before seeking registry counsel appointment.
The Court held that Moldof remains counsel of record because the death sentence has not been carried out and no court order terminating his representation exists. Registry counsel may only be appointed after existing counsel obtains permission to withdraw. The appeal was dismissed without prejudice to allow the circuit court to consider appointment of registry counsel following proper withdrawal of original counsel.
[1] An attorney of record remains counsel of record unless released by court order.
[2] A motion for appointment of registry counsel may be considered by the circuit court when existing counsel obtains permission to withdraw from representation.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Because Mr. Suggs' death sentence has not been carried out and the record is devoid of any evidence showing that the circuit court entered an order terminating Attorney Moldofs status as Mr. Suggs' counsel of record, we find that Attorney Moldof is presently Mr. Suggs' counsel of record in state courts.”
Establishes that original trial counsel retains status as counsel of record absent formal termination order or execution.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceErnest Suggs was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. His conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal in 1994. Subseque…
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 Withdrawal Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
Ernest Suggs, a prisoner under a sentence of death, appeals the denial of his motion for appointment of registry counsel in connection with a prospective successive motion for postconviction relief he intends to file pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.851. We have jurisdiction. See art. V. § 3(b)(1), Fla. Const.
This Court affirmed Mr. Suggs’ conviction for first-degree murder and his sentence of death on direct appeal in Suggs v. State, 644 So.2d 64 (Fla.1994). Subsequently, this Court affirmed the denial of Mr. Suggs’ motion for postconviction relief and denied his petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, both of which were litigated by Mr. Suggs’ then-privately retained counsel Hilliard Moldof. Suggs v. State, 923 So.2d 419 (Fla.2005).
In March 2006, the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida appointed Florida attorney Martin J. McClain to represent Mr. Suggs in federal court. The Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district courts’ denial of Mr. Suggs’ petition for *472habeas corpus in Suggs v. McNeil, 609 F.3d 1218 (11th Cir.2010), and the United States Supreme Court denied his petition for writ of certiorari in Suggs v. Buss, — U.S.—, 131 S.Ct. 1809, 179 L.Ed.2d 659 (2011).
On August 27, 2012, Attorney McClain filed a motion pursuant to sections 27.7001, 27.710, and 27.711, Florida Statutes (2011) with the Circuit Court of the First Judicial Circuit, requesting that he be appointed to represent Mr. Suggs as registry counsel in any successive postconviction relief proceedings in state courts. The circuit court entered an order denying the motion for appointment of registry counsel on February 15, 2013. On or about March 15, 2013, as pro bono counsel, Attorney McClain filed a notice of appeal with this Court seeking review of the circuit court’s order.
Because Mr. Suggs’ death sentence has not been carried out and the record is devoid of any evidence showing that the circuit court entered an order terminating Attorney Moldofs status as Mr. Suggs’ counsel of record, we find that Attorney Moldof is presently Mr. Suggs’ counsel of record in state courts. See Fla. R. Jud. Admin.' 2.505(f)(l)-(3) (outlining modes by which an attorney’s appearance for a party terminates); see also Van Poyck v. State, No. 73,662 (Fla. May 10, 2013) (Order Remanding Case for Determination of Counsel of Record).
Attorney Moldof shall maintain his status as Mr. Suggs’ counsel of record unless Attorney Móldof has previously obtained a court order releasing him from representation, or until such a court order issues. Accordingly, we dismiss without prejudice for the circuit court to consider appointment of new counsel under the registry statute should existing counsel obtain permission to withdraw from representation. At such time, Mr. Suggs may then file with the circuit court a subsequent motion for appointment of registry counsel.
It is so ordered.
LABARGA, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, POLSTON, and PERRY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Merck v. State, 216 So. 3d 1285 (Fla. 2017)…2014). CCRC-MR conceded below that the same conflict of interest precludes its continued representation of Merck in state court. However, the circuit court struck the motions at issue as unauthorized after construing our decision in Suggs v. State, 152 So. 3d 471 (Fla. 2014), to condition the termination of an attorney’s representation upon the filing of a motion to withdraw, which CCRC-MR has not filed. In so ruling, the circuit court erred. As we explained in Suggs, Florida Rule of Judicial Administration…
-
L. T. v. State of Fla. & T.J.T. (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)…ing to a criminal case. Barnett, 122 So. 3d at 405- 06. The trial court’s denial of the victim’s writ of mandamus was 4 Rules of Judicial Administration apply to criminal proceedings. See Merck v. State, 216 So. 3d 1285 (Fla. 2017); Suggs v. State, 152 So. 3d 471 (Fla. 2014). affirmed as the victim failed to show that the State Attorney violated a “clear legal right.” Id. at 406. Here, L.T. received notice and was informed of her right to be present at all hearings, aside from the early events of the Firs…
Authorities Cited
- Suggs v. State, 923 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 2005)
- Suggs v. McNEIL, 609 F.3d 1218 (11th Cir. 2010)
- Suggs v. State, 644 So. 2d 64 (Fla. 1994)