WILLIAM PADRON
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA
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.
A defendant challenging counsel's performance on the grounds of guilt admission must have expressly asserted to counsel a desire to maintain innocence; absent such express assertion, counsel's concession of guilt does not constitute ineffective assistance under the Sixth Amendment.
[1] A defense attorney cannot concede a defendant's guilt over the defendant's express objection to maintaining innocence.
[2] To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must demonstrate both constitutionally deficient performance and resulting prejudice that deprived the defenda…
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“When a client expressly asserts that the objective of 'his defence' is to maintain innocence of the charged criminal acts, his lawyer must abide by that objective and may not override it by conceding guilt.”
McCoy v. Louisiana, 138 S. Ct. 1500, 1509 (2018)
William Padron appealed from a circuit court's denial of his motion for postconviction relief challenging his criminal conviction. Padron asserted tha…
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 Right To Effective Assistance Of Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See McCoy v. Louisiana, ___ U.S. ___, 138 S. Ct. 1500, 1509 (2018) (holding: “When a client expressly asserts that that the objective of ‘his defence’ is to maintain innocence of the charged criminal acts, his lawyer must abide by that objective and may not override it by conceding guilt.”); Atwater v. State, 300 So. 3d 589, 591 (Fla. 2020) (affirming the trial court’s denial of Atwater’s motion for postconviction relief, noting that, unlike the defendant in McCoy, Atwater never expressed to counsel that he wished to maintain his innocence or objected to any admission of guilt at trial: “The crux of Atwater’s argument is to fault counsel for failing to discuss with Atwater the potential trial strategy of conceding guilt”). See also Strickland
v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984) (holding that a defendant must
establish both constitutionally deficient performance and resulting prejudice that is ”so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable. Unless a defendant makes both showings, it cannot be said that the conviction. . . resulted from a breakdown in the adversary process that renders the result unreliable.”)
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984)
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- McCoy v. Louisiana., 138 S. Ct. 1500 (U.S. 2018)
- Atwater v. State, 300 So. 3d 589 (Fla. 2020)