ASHLEY BRITT MCARTHUR
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.
Ashley Britt McArthur petitioned for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel in her criminal case. The First District Court of Appeal dismissed the petition, finding it facially without merit.
The petition was dismissed as facially without merit. The court found that McArthur failed to establish ineffective assistance of appellate counsel.
[1] In a petition for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, when pleading requirements are satisfied, the merits of the allegations must be examined based on the trial…
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“the petition to be facially without merit”
The majority's basis for dismissing the petition without detailed analysis
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceMcArthur filed a petition alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel, raising three grounds for relief. The petition alleged that her appell…
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 Petition For Ineffective Assistance Of Appellate Counsel cases and more on FLexlaw
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA _____________________________
No. 1D2023-183 _____________________________
ASHLEY BRITT MCARTHUR,
Petitioner,
v. STATE OF FLORIDA,
Respondent.
_____________________________
Petition Alleging Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel— Original Jurisdiction.
April 24, 2024 PER CURIAM.
Having considered the averments of all three grounds in the petition, the court finds the petition to be facially without merit.
DISMISSED.
B.L. THOMAS and TANENBAUM, JJ., concur; BILBREY, J., concurs in result.
_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
_____________________________
CORRECTED PAGE: 2 CORRECTION IS UNDERLINED IN RED MAILED: 4/24/24 BY: KS
BILBREY, J., concurring in result. The result of the majority’s decision dismissing the petition is that Petitioner will not have his sentence vacated and the matter remanded for a new trial. I agree with that result but arrive at it differently than the majority. The petition for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel complies with the pleading requirements of rule 9.141(d), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. The petition sets forth a prima facie basis for relief — that is the petition is legally sufficient in its pleadings to allege grounds for relief if true. See Freeman v. State, 761 So. 2d 1055, 1061 (Fla. 2000) (holding that in a postconviction case the petitioner “bears the burden of establishing a prima facie case based upon a legally valid claim”). So we then examine the merits of the allegations and look at the record from the trial and subsequent direct appeal to determine whether we should grant relief. See Moorer v. State, 330 So. 3d 136, 137 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021) (denying a petition for ineffective assistance of appellate counsel when “the pleading requirements of Rule 9.141(d)” were met but “[b]ased on a review of the record” the claims lacked merit). Since the petition here is facially valid in that it alleges two bases for relief, but it is without merit since when we look into the record appellate counsel on the direct appeal was not ineffective, I would deny rather than dismiss the petition.
_____________________________
William R. Ponall of Ponall Law, P.A., Maitland; Lisabeth J. Fryer and Laura L. Cepero of Lisabeth J. Fryer, P.A., Sanford, for Petitioner. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.