WILEME BAPTISTE
v.
THE 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.
The summary denial of a postconviction Rule 3.850 motion raising multiple ineffective assistance of counsel claims was affirmed.
[1] An evidentiary hearing is generally required before concluding that trial counsel's action or inaction was the result of a strategic decision in an ineffective assistance…
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“Summarily denied claims are reviewed de novo, and we must accept [the defendant's] factual allegations to the extent that they are not refuted by the record.”
Standard for reviewing summarily denied postconviction claims, cited from Johnson v. State
Wileme Baptiste filed a postconviction Rule 3.850 motion raising thirteen claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and cumulative error. Two …
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 Strategic Decision cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed.
LINDSEY and BOKOR, JJ., concur.
2
Wileme Baptiste v. The State of Florida Case No. 3D24-0475 LOBREE, J. (concurring in part and dissenting in part) Wileme Baptiste appeals from the summary denial of his motion for postconviction relief pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850, wherein he raised thirteen claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel and cumulative error. I concur with the majority in affirming the summary denial of all claims other than grounds ten and eleven pertaining to counsel’s failure to move for a mistrial after the jury reported a deadlock following an Allen1 charge, and failure to object to and instead agreeing with the jury’s continued deliberation. See Baptiste v. State, 306 So. 3d 306, 308-09 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020), approved, 324 So. 3d 453 (Fla. 2021). With respect to these claims, I would reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing. See Johnson v. State, 382 So. 3d 22, 24 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024) (“Summarily denied claims are reviewed de novo, and we must accept [the defendant’s] factual allegations to the extent that they are not refuted by the record.”); Floyd v. State, 349 So. 3d 519, 520 (Fla. 5th DCA 2022) (“Generally, an evidentiary hearing is required before concluding that certain action or inaction by trial counsel was the result of a strategic decision.” (citing Patrick v. State, 246
3
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wileme Baptiste v. State, 382 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)…o move for a mistrial after the jury reported a deadlock following an Allen1 charge, and failure to object to and instead agreeing with the jury’s continued deliberation. See Baptiste v. State, 306 So. 3d 306, 308-09 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020), approved, 324 So. 3d 453 (Fla. 2021). With respect to these claims, I would reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing. See Johnson v. State, 382 So. 3d 22, 24 (Fla. 2d DCA 2024) (“Summarily denied claims are reviewed de novo, and we must accept [the defendant’s] fact…1 / 3
-
Carrion v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2022)
-
Johnson v. State (Fla. 1st DCA 2024)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 (U.S. 1896)
- Wileme Baptiste v. State, 382 So. 3d 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)
- Wileme Baptiste v. State, 306 So. 3d 306 (Fla. 2021)