MATTHEW COLLITO
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.
Appellate counsel cannot be deemed ineffective for failing to raise non-meritorious claims on appeal, and a defendant who entered a plea and whose judgment reflects an incorrect statutory version of the crime must pursue relief through a Rule 3.850 petition challenging trial counsel rather than through appellate ineffectiveness.
[1] In a direct appeal from a guilty plea, appellate review is limited to express reservations of issues, subject matter jurisdiction, involuntariness of the plea, sentencing…
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 intelligence“appellate counsel cannot be considered ineffective for failing to raise non-meritorious claims on appeal”
Court explaining why appellate counsel's failure to address the judgment discrepancy does not constitute ineffective assistance
Collito was charged with sexual battery involving a victim under twelve and a defendant under eighteen, entered a plea agreement, but the judgment ref…
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 Anders Brief cases and more on FLexlaw
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA
FIFTH DISTRICT
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO
FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND
DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED
MATTHEW COLLITO,
Petitioner,
v. Case No. 5D20-1766
STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent.
________________________________/
Opinion filed November 20, 2020
Petition Alleging Ineffectiveness of Appellate Counsel, A Case of Original Jurisdiction.
Matthew Collito, Bowling Green, pro se.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Douglas T. Squire, Assistant Attorney General, Daytona Beach, for Respondent.
PER CURIAM.
Matthew Collito petitions this Court for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(d), alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. In the underlying proceedings, Collito was charged with a version of sexual battery that involved a victim under the age of twelve and a defendant under the age of eighteen. He subsequently entered into a plea agreement, but the judgment reflected a version of
2 sexual battery involving a defendant over the age of eighteen. It is undisputed that Collito was under the age of eighteen at the time of the offense. In his direct appeal, Collito’s appellate counsel filed an Anders1 brief, which did not address the discrepancy in the judgment, and this Court per curiam affirmed. See Collito v. State, 291 So. 3d 111 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020). Despite the judgment reflecting an incorrect version of sexual battery, we deny Collito’s petition. Because he entered a plea, the issues cognizable in his direct appeal were limited. § 924.06(3), Fla. Stat. (2019); Fla. R. App. P. 9.140(b)(2)(A)(i)–(ii).2 Having failed to meet any of the delineated grounds to appeal from his plea, Collito cannot establish that appellate counsel was ineffective. See Valle v. Moore, 837 So. 2d 905, 908 (Fla. 2002) (noting that appellate counsel cannot be considered ineffective for failing to raise non-meritorious claims on appeal). Instead, Collito’s remedy, if any, is under Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, through a petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.850. Accordingly, we deny the petition without prejudice to Collito filing a timely and facially sufficient motion under rule 3.850.
PETITION DENIED.
ORFINGER, COHEN and EDWARDS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (U.S. 1967)
- Valle v. Moore, 837 So. 2d 905 (Fla. 2002)
- Collito v. State, 291 So. 3d 111 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020)