SHENARD KING, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, RESPONDENT

Fla. 4th DCA | 2013-08-14
No. 4D13-1012
MAY, CONNER, and FORST, JJ„ concur.
120 So. 3d 108 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (2013)

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.


Holding

The court held that the defendant failed to show deficient performance or prejudice from appellate counsel's failure to challenge the sufficiency of evidence for battery on a law enforcement officer.


Facts & Procedural History

Defendant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel for failing to challenge the sufficiency of …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus. He alleged ineffectiveness of appellate counsel in failing to challenge the sufficiency of evidence to support the battery on a law enforcement officer conviction in his direct appeal.1 While habeas corpus is the correct vehicle for reviewing appellate counsel’s effectiveness, the defendant cannot show that failure to raise this claim was either deficient performance or prejudicial. Dennis v. State, 109 So.3d 680 (Fla.2012).

*109Section 776.051(1), Florida Statutes (2008), prohibits the use of force to resist either arrest or the execution of a legal duty by a law enforcement officer unless the defendant can show that the officer was not acting in good faith. A.W. v. State, 82 So.3d 1136, 1139 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012). There was no such showing here.

Defendant’s alternative claim that appellate counsel was ineffective in failing to argue the prosecutor improperly vouched for the credibility of the officer is insufficiently pled and no error has been established. Pittman v. State, 90 So.3d 794, 819 (Fla.2011).2

We therefore deny the petition.

MAY, CONNER, and FORST, JJ„ concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw