DARRYL ARNOLD, PETITIONER-APPELLEE,

v.

SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, FLORIDA ATTORNEY GENERAL, RESPONDENTS-APPELLANTS

Citator

Cited By (13 total)

• United States v. Moran, 778 F.3d 942 (11th Cir. 2015)
  …im fails too. While this Court ordinarily decides claims of ineffective counsel through a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion, we may consider such claims on direct appeal if the record is sufficiently developed, as it is here. See United States v. Patterson, 595 F. 3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir.2010). To prevail on an ineffective counsel claim in a criminal case, a defendant must show both that counsel’s performance was deficient and that counsel’s performance prejudiced the defense. Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668…
• United States v. Curbelo, 726 F.3d 1260 (11th Cir. 2013)
  …y developed, we will not address claims for ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal.” Verbitskaya, 406 F. 3d at 1337. An ineffective assistance claim should usually be raised in a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. United States v. Patterson, 595 F. 3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir.2010). Defendant asserts that the record is sufficiently developed to conclude his counsel was ineffective. But the record does not show the DEA ever tracked Defendant’s telephone or vehicle. Thus, on this record, Defendant’s counse…
• United States v. Martinez, 606 F.3d 1303 (11th Cir. 2010)
  …decided by the panel. The mandatory restitution in Tampas was authorized as a “sentencing provision” found in the criminal statute 18 U.S.C. § 3663A(a), id., and required factfinding as part of the sentencing packet, see United States v. Patterson, 595 F. 3d 1324, 1327 (11th Cir.2010). Tampas is controlling case law predating Canty on whether a panel may on remand for resentencing allow the government to introduce new evidence. And, of course, “[u]nder the prior precedent rule, we are bound to follow a pri…

Authorities Cited

• Arnold v. McNeil, 622 F. Supp. 2d 1294 (M.D. Fla. 2009)