DARRIUS WILLIAM MILLER
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.
A defendant who knowingly and voluntarily concurs in or waives ineffective assistance of counsel at trial cannot later collaterally attack that waiver through a Rule 3.850 motion.
[1] A defendant's knowing, voluntary, and intelligent waiver of a constitutional right, including a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel at trial, precludes collateral…
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 intelligenceMiller appealed the circuit court's summary denial of his postconviction motion for relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, which raise…
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 Collateral Attack On Conviction cases and more on FLexlaw
SIXTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
Case No. 6D2024-1355 Lower Tribunal No. 2016-CF-009530-A-O _____________________________
DARRIUS WILLIAM MILLER, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _____________________________
Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Orange County. Leticia Marques, Judge.
January 9, 2026
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Fla. R. App. P. 9.141(b)(2)(D) (establishing that the summary denial of all claims raised in a motion for postconviction relief under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, without an evidentiary hearing, is appropriate if “the record shows conclusively that the appellant is entitled to no relief”); State v. Upton, 658 So. 2d 86, 87 (Fla. 1995) (“An effective waiver of a constitutional right must be knowing, voluntary, and intelligent” (citing Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1970))); Ross v. State, 392 So. 2d 23, 24 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980) (Anstead, J., concurring specially) (“[E]ven
2
if a prima facie showing of failure to render reasonably effective assistance of counsel has been made, such ineffective assistance was known to defendant at time of trial, knowingly and voluntarily concurred in by him, and cannot support this collateral attack. . . . Even though his complaint of ineffective assistance of counsel is of constitutional dimension, he has knowingly waived the error, consenting thereto.” (citations omitted)); see generally Chames v. DeMayo, 972 So. 2d 850, 860 (Fla. 2007) (observing that “a trend has developed toward permitting the [knowing, voluntary, and intelligent] waiver of constitutional rights, especially rights given to criminal defendants” (collecting cases)). NARDELLA, WOZNIAK and PRATT, JJ., concur.
Susanne Sichta and Rick Sichta, of The Sichta Firm, LCC, Jacksonville, for Appellant.
James Uthmeier, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rebecca Rock McGuigan, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Appellee
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF TIMELY FILED
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (U.S. 1970)
- Chames v. DeMAYO, 972 So. 2d 850 (Fla. 2007)
- Ross v. State, 392 So. 2d 23 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)