ROBERT LOWE PARKER, 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.
Robert Parker was convicted of rape and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, he challenged the sufficiency of evidence and claimed incompetent counsel; the appellate court affirmed the conviction, finding the evidence sufficient and the trial representation adequate.
The conviction was affirmed. The appellate court held that the trial was neither a mockery nor a farce and that Parker received able representation. The jury verdict is supported by substantial credible evidence and will not be disturbed on appeal.
[1] A criminal defendant is entitled to a fair trial, not necessarily a perfect one.
[2] The test for ineffective assistance of counsel is whether the trial was reduced to a mockery or a farce.
Previewing 2 of 5 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“the test as to competency of trial counsel is whether the facts alleged show that the trial was reduced to a mockery or a farce”
Establishes the legal standard for evaluating trial counsel competency claims
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceParker and the rape victim, a barmaid, had been drinking together at a motel lounge. Parker invited the victim to his room to show her something. A ph…
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 Competency Of Trial Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
BOYER, Judge.
The defendant, appellant, was convicted of rape and sentenced to life imprisonment. He was represented by an assistant public defender. The thrusts of his appeal are essentially that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction and that he was represented by incompetent trial counsel.
Disposing of the latter contention first, it has generally been held that the test as to competency of trial counsel is whether the facts alleged show that the trial was reduced to a mockery or a farce. (Simpson v. State, Fla.App. (3d) 1964, 164 So. 2d 224; Potts v. State, Fla.App. (2d) 1971, 242 So. 2d 729) Our ‘ examination of the record reveals that the trial was neither a mockery nor a farce and that in fact defendant received able representation.
A defendant in a criminal case is entitled to a fair trial, not necessarily a perfect one. (Frazier v. State, Fla.App. (1st) 1974, 294 So. 2d 691.
With respect to the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, we have often stated that a jury verdict will not be disturbed unless it is clearly demonstrated to be unsupported by competent and substantial evidence (Ellison v. State, Fla.App. (1st) 1971, 254 So. 2d 837; Thomas v. State, Fla.App. (1st) 1969, 223 So. 2d 118; Phillips v. State, Fla.App. (1st) 1969, 223 So. 2d 60)
In a jury trial, whether it he civil or criminal, the jury is the ultimate fact finder and, when the evidence is conflicting, if there is substantial credible evidence in the record to sustain the jury’s verdict it may not be disturbed on appeal. The Supreme Court of Florida has repeatedly admonished District Courts to beware of substituting appellate factual judgments for those of the trier of facts. (See Westerman v. Shell’s City, Inc., Sup.Ct.Fla.1972, 265 So. 2d 43; Exchange Bank of St. Augustine, etc. v. Fla. National Bank of Jacksonville, etc., Sup.Ct.Fla.1974, 292 So. 2d 361).
The record before us reveals that the rape victim was a barmaid with whom the defendant had been drinking prior to the rape incident. They arranged to meet in the lounge of the motel at which defendant was staying and upon leaving the defendant asked the victim to accompany him to his room because he had something to show her. A physician testified at the trial that following the incident he conducted a vaginal examination of the victim and found live sperm indicating recent intercourse as well as traumatic laceration of the vagina. Multiple witnesses testified to bruises and abrasions. The defendant testified that the victim asked to go, to his room, and that once in the room she fell across the bed voluntarily and took her clothes off. He testified that the injuries which she received were the result of horseplay.
The jury heard all of the evidence and resolved the conflicts contrary to the contentions of the defendant. Our examination of the record reveals that the jury’s verdict is supported by a preponderance of the evidence and, of course, it was for the jury to determine whether they were convinced beyond and to the exclusion of a reasonable doubt. They did so find and we may not disturb that finding.
Affirmed.
RAWLS, C. J., and McCORD, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gibson v. State, 351 So. 2d 948 (Fla. 1977)…adverse to the appealing party was made. Ashford v. State, 274 So. 2d 517 (Fla.1973); Silver v. State, 188 So. 2d 300 (Fla.1966). In any event, the alleged incompetence must be such that the trial was reduced to a mockery or a sham. Parker v. State, 295 So. 2d 312 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); McCrae v. State, 313 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Biggs v. United States, 318 F.Supp. 212 (N.D.Fla. 1970). There is nothing in the record to support such a finding by this court. It is probable that appellant’s counsel offered…
-
McCRAE v. State, 313 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…concedes that the test generally employed in Florida in determining whether or not a defendant has received reasonably effective counsel is whether the facts alleged demonstrate that the trial was a mockery or a farce. Parker v. State, Fla.App.1974, 295 So. 2d 312; see also, West v. State of Louisiana, 478 F. 2d 1026 (5th Cir. 1973). We do not think the absence of testimony of the two witnesses denied the appellant a fair trial. At most, she did not receive a perfect trial. Frazier v. State, Fla.App. 1974, 2…
-
Parker v. State, 336 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…[*427] BOYER, Chief Judge. Appellant was tried and convicted of rape, and his conviction was affirmed by this Court. (Parker v. State, Fla.App.1st 1974, 295 So. 2d 312) He thereupon filed a motion to vacate and set aside judgment and sentence, pursuant to Rule 3.850, RCrP, in which motion he alleges that one of the jurors at his trial voted for a conviction because of an improper reason. The trial court denied the…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Simpson v. State, 164 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
- Westerman v. Shell's City, Inc., 265 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 1972)
- Exch. Bank OF ST. Augustine v. The Fla. Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville, 292 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 1974)
- Frazier v. State, 294 So. 2d 691 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Potts v. State, 242 So. 2d 729 (Fla. 2d DCA 1971)
- Thomas v. State, 223 So. 2d 118 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)
- Phillips v. State, 223 So. 2d 60 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)
- Ellison v. State, 254 So. 2d 837 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)