JOERIS
v.
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.
Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(d) does not provide a procedural mechanism to challenge the effectiveness of postconviction appellate counsel.
[1] A claim of ineffective assistance of postconviction appellate counsel is not cognizable under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(d).
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLeonard Simon Joeris III filed a petition in the First District Court of Appeal alleging that his postconviction appellate counsel provided ineffectiv…
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.
Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel— Original Jurisdiction.
September 25, 2024 PER CURIAM.
DISMISSED. See Gilbert v. State, 315 So. 3d 791, 791 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (dismissing petition because “Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(d) does not provide a vehicle to challenge postconviction appellate counsel’s effectiveness”); see also Hunter v. State, 48 So. 3d 836, 1 (Fla. 2010) (“This Court has repeatedly rejected claims of ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel.” (citing cases)).
B.L. THOMAS, NORDBY, and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur.
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.