ALAN COURSEY, 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.
Alan Coursey appeals the denial of his postconviction motion for ineffective assistance of counsel. The appellate court affirmed the denial of most claims but reversed and remanded one claim regarding counsel's alleged failure to move to suppress his confession, finding it was not waived by his guilty plea and required remand for the trial court to allow Coursey to file a facially sufficient amended motion.
The court held that while Coursey stated a legally sufficient claim of ineffective assistance (which is not waived by plea), he failed to allege the required prejudice element—specifically, that there was a reasonable probability he would have insisted on going to trial but for counsel's failure to suppress the confession. The court therefore reversed and remanded for the trial court to allow an amended motion.
[1] An allegation that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to file a motion to suppress is a legally sufficient claim that is not waived by the entry of…
[2] To establish ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to file a motion to suppress, a defendant must allege prejudice, meaning a reasonable probability that they wou…
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“[a]n allegation that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to file a motion to suppress is a legally sufficient claim, which is not waived by entry of a plea.”
Establishes that ineffective assistance claims based on failure to suppress are not waived by guilty plea, contrary to the postconviction court's ruling
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 2010, Coursey pleaded guilty to multiple sexual offenses involving a minor, including attempted sexual battery, lewd and lascivious molestation, se…
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 Motion To Suppress Confession cases and more on FLexlaw
Alan Coursey appeals an order denying his motion for postconviction relief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. In 2010, he pleaded guilty to four counts of attempted sexual battery on a victim less than twelve years old, four counts of lewd and lascivious molestation on a victim less than twelve years old, five counts of sexual battery on a child, and one count of showing obscene material to a minor. Mr. Coursey was sentenced to forty years in prison with a twenty-five-year minimum mandatory term and lifetime sexual offender probation for three of the molestation offenses, five years in prison for showing obscene material to a minor, and thirty years in prison for the remaining offenses. He did not file a direct appeal of his judgments and sentences.
We conclude that the postconviction court properly denied Mr. Coursey’s motion but note that one of his arguments should have been denied without prejudice. In his motion, Mr. Coursey argued that the court erred in summarily denying his claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to move to suppress his confession because the confession he gave to law enforcement was involuntary. The post-conviction court denied this claim based on Mr. Coursey’s statements at the change of plea hearing. The court noted that Mr. Coursey indicated that he was able to discuss the entire case with his attorney and that he was satisfied with the attorney’s performance. Further, at the change of *120plea hearing the trial court explained the constitutional rights Mr. Coursey was waiving by entering a plea and he indicated that he understood. The postconviction court ruled that the claim was merely an attempt to go behind the plea and raise issues that were knowingly and voluntarily waived by the plea agreement as proscribed by Stano v. State, 520 So.2d 278 (Fla.1988), Gidney v. State, 925 So.2d 1076 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006), and Dean v. State, 580 So.2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
However, as noted by this court in Campbell v. State, 139 So.3d 490, 497 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014), “[a]n allegation that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to file a motion to suppress is a legally sufficient claim, which is not waived by entry of a plea.” (quoting Spencer v. State, 889 So.2d 868, 870 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)). Although he stated a legally sufficient claim, Mr. Coursey failed to allege that he suffered prejudice as a result of counsel’s conduct, “i.e., that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, he would have insisted on going to trial.” Campbell, 139 So.3d at 497 (citing Nelson v. State, 996 So.2d 950, 952 (Fla. 2d DCA 2008)).
Accordingly, we reverse the denial of claim three of the postconviction motion and remand for the postconviction court to strike the claim with leave for Mr. Coursey to file a facially sufficient motion within sixty days. See Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850(f)(3) (directing that when a postconviction court finds that a timely motion contains some insufficient claims, it must enter a nonap-pealable order granting the defendant sixty days to file an amended motion sufficiently stating claims for relief); see also Spera v. State, 971 So.2d 754, 761 (Fla. 2007). The order denying the motion for postconviction relief is otherwise affirmed.
Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded.
SILBERMAN and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Issac G. Sanchez v. State, 210 So. 3d 252 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017)…t’s acknowledgment during plea colloquy that he was satisfied with counsel’s performance did not refute claim that counsel failed to investigate where defendant’s motion did not state when he learned of counsel’s failure); see also Coursey v. State, 164 So. 3d 119, 120 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (“[A]n allegation that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to file a motion to suppress is a legally sufficient claim, which is not waived by entry of a plea.” (quoting Campbell v. State, 139 So. 3d 490,…
Authorities Cited
- Spera v. State, 971 So. 2d 754 (Fla. 2007)
- Stano v. State, 520 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 1988)
- Gidney v. State, 925 So. 2d 1076 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)
- Dean v. State, 580 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)
- Davis v. State, 996 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008)
- Spencer v. State, 889 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
- Tecoy Marquis Campbell v. State, 139 So. 3d 490 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)
- Dutertre v. State, 889 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)
- Yachtbrasil Motor Boats & Charters, LLC v. Gluck, 139 So. 3d 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 2014)