DAVID STANLEY CARTER, 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.
Appellant's motion to vacate judgment and sentence for second degree murder was denied because his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, constitutional trial violations, and prosecutorial misconduct were either insufficiently alleged or previously raised and rejected on direct appeal.
A defendant's motion to vacate judgment under Rule 3.850 must be denied when claims of ineffective assistance of counsel lack factual support and other constitutional claims were already raised and addressed on direct appeal.
[1] A defendant seeking to vacate a judgment under Rule 3.850 on grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel must allege specific facts supporting the claim, not merely conc…
[2] Constitutional claims raised and argued on direct appeal are not properly subject to reconsideration in a Rule 3.850 motion to vacate.
Previewing 2 of 2 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCarter was indicted for first degree murder, convicted of second degree murder, and appealed; his judgment and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal…
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 Juvenile Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant, on an indictment for first degree murder, was found guilty of second degree murder. He appealed and the judgment and sentence were affirmed by this court. See Carter v. State, Fla.App., 263 So. 2d 851. The cause is now before this court on a denial without hearing of appellant’s motion to vacate judgment and sentence pursuant to Rule 3.850, Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 33 F.S.A.
Appellant contends that (1) he was denied effective assistance of counsel, (2) he was denied a constitutionally fair trial in that the trial judge allowed into evidence inculpatory statements obtained from appellant in violation of his juvenile rights and his Miranda rights, and (3) that he was denied a constitutionally fair trial in that the trial judge did not order certain alleged inflammatory remarks by the prosecuting attorney in his closing argument stricken from the record.
As to Point One, appellant has made numerous statements of conclusions but has failed to allege sufficient facts to support his conclusion that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. An examination of the record in this court on appellant’s direct appeal reveals that Points Two and Three were raised in the assignments of error and Point Two was argued in the briefs. The order of the trial court denying appellant’s motion to vacate judgment and sentence is affirmed. See Peterson v. State, Fla.App., 237 So. 2d 223; Potts v. State, Fla.App., 242 So. 2d 729; State v. Barton, Fla., 194 So. 2d 241; House v. State, Fla.App., 199 So. 2d 134.
SPECTOR, Acting C. J., and McCORD and BOYER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Taylor v. State, 332 So. 2d 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Carter v. State, Fla.App. (1st), 292 So. 2d 33 (1974). RAWLS, Acting C. J., and McCORD and SMITH, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- State v. Barton, 194 So. 2d 241 (Fla. 1967)
- Peterson v. State, 237 So. 2d 223 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)
- Potts v. State, 242 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)
- House v. State, 199 So. 2d 134 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)
- Nettie Helen Jennings v. Sunshine Biscuit Co., 263 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)
- Carter v. State, 263 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)