ELLIS TAYLOR, JR., 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.
The court held that the defendant's claims regarding insufficient evidence and a conflict of interest with his counsel were not grounds for post-conviction relief.
The defendant was convicted of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony. He appealed the denial of his motion for post-conviction relief, …
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 Conflict Of Interest cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant Ellis Taylor, Jr. appeals the denial of motion for post-conviction relief.
The defendant was tried on information charging breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony and grand larceny. The court directed a verdict of not guilty on the charge of grand larceny, and the jury found the defendant guilty of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony.
A careful examination of the record and of the briefs of counsel discloses that the defendant was represented by counsel at all critical stages of his trial. The petition for relief sets forth that the evidence was not sufficient to sustain his conviction and that *403the Public Defender, counsel for the defendant, and one of the witnesses, the owner of the juke box allegedly broken into, were related in that said witness and the wife of the Public Defender were cousins.
The sufficiency of evidence cannot properly be raised under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix; Austin v. State, Fla.App.1964, 160 So. 2d 730; Bell v. State, Fla.App.1964, 168 So. 2d 336. Allegation of naked conclusion that prisoner was denied fair trial by failure of court-appointed counsel to represent him competently, without allegations of fact sufficient to show that appointed counsel was so incompetent as to render trial a mockery and farcical, fails to state grounds for post-conviction relief. Sam v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So.2d 258.
ALLEN, Acting C. J-, and WHITE and ANDREWS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Crusoe v. State, 183 So. 2d 600 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)…e raised on collateral attack by a motion under Criminal Procedure Rule No. 1. Harper v. State, Fla.App.1964, 168 So. 2d 325; Piehl v. State, Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 723; Wilcox v. State, Fla.App.1965, 171 So. 2d 427; Taylor v. State, Fla.App.1965, 171 So. 2d 402; Mason v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So. 2d 618; Harris v. State, Fla.App.1964, 167 So. 2d 312; Mitchell v. State, Fla.App. 1964, 167 So. 2d 27. As to that quoted portion of the motion dealing with Court proceedings on June 5, 1964, such allegations…
-
Whitlow v. State, 256 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)…y virtue of any “questioning and interrogation”. (3) On Voluntariness of Plea. A motion for relief under CrPR 1.850 must allege facts, not conclusions, sufficient to demonstrate deprivation of a constitutional right. Taylor v. State, Fla. App.1965, 171 So. 2d 402; Sam v. State, [*50] Fla.App. 1964, 167 So. 2d 258. No facts were alleged here to show that the guilty plea was entered involuntarily or without understanding the full import and consequences thereof. The order appealed from was properly entered an…
-
State v. Garmise, 382 So. 2d 769 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Potts V. State, 242 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971); Meinsen v. State, 240 So. 2d 188 (Fla. 2d DCA 1970); Plymale v. State, 182 So. 2d 57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); Wade v. State, 177 So. 2d 695 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965); Taylor v. State, 171 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965); Sam v. State, 167 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964); Simpson v. State, 164 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). The foregoing line of cases have held that the services of a defendant’s court-appointed counsel are ineffective or [*772] inco…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Austin v. State, 160 So. 2d 730 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Erwin v. Erwin, 167 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- Bell v. State, 168 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
- W. Fla. Tel. Co. v. Fla. Pub. Utils. Co., 168 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)