JEFFREY K MCLENDON
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.
Body camera video admitted through counsel stipulation and appellant agreement, and law enforcement statements admitted without contemporaneous objection, were properly received, and ineffective assistance of trial counsel claims cannot be raised on direct appeal without fundamental error.
[1] A defendant's claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel cannot be raised on direct appeal absent a showing of fundamental error.
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 intelligenceJeffrey K McLendon appealed his conviction from Columbia County Circuit Court. On appeal, he claimed error in the admission of body camera video and h…
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 Anders Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
December 11, 2024 PER CURIAM.
After appointed counsel was permitted to withdraw in this Anders* appeal, Appellant filed a pro se brief claiming error in the admission of certain inculpatory evidence as well as ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We disagree and affirm.
As to the admission of body camera video, Appellant’s counsel stipulated to its admission, and Appellant agreed with the stipulation after the trial court conducted a colloquy on the record. As to Appellant’s interview by law enforcement, there was no contemporaneous objection to the admission of Appellant’s statements. See State v. Petroni, 123 So. 3d 62, 66 (Fla. 1st DCA
* Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967).
2013). Finally, since no fundamental error has occurred, Appellant cannot raise his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel in this direct appeal. See Carmack v. State, 377 So. 3d 1242, 1243 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024).
AFFIRMED.
RAY, BILBREY, and LONG, JJ., concur.
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
McLendon v. State, 377 So. 3d 1242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)…d 62, 66 (Fla. 1st DCA * Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). 2013). Finally, since no fundamental error has occurred, Appellant cannot raise his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel in this direct appeal. See Carmack v. State, 377 So. 3d 1242, 1243 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024). AFFIRMED. RAY, BILBREY, and LONG, JJ., concur. _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _____________________________ Jessica J.…
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- State v. Petroni, 123 So. 3d 62 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)
- McLendon v. State, 377 So. 3d 1242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)