Richard Jackson v. the State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledJuly 22, 2020
Docket3D20-0069
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed July 22, 2020.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D20-0069
Lower Tribunal No. 07-19315B
________________
Richard Jackson,
Appellant,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Appellee.
An appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the
Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Spencer Multack, Judge.
Richard Jackson, in proper person.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Joanne Diez, Assistant Attorney
General, for appellee.
Before SCALES, MILLER, and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Koons v. State, 165 So. 3d 718, 720 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)
(“[Appellant’s] successive motion did not allege that the grounds asserted were new
and different. Nor did it allege any good cause for failing to raise any new and
different claims in his first 3.850 motion. Because the motion was facially
insufficient and [appellant] failed to meet his burden, we affirm the trial court’s
order.”); Sampson v. State, 793 So. 2d 149, 150 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001) (“[Appellant]
failed to allege any circumstances which would have prevented the State from
simply refiling an amended information which was sufficient. Because [appellant]
failed to allege a facially sufficient claim, we affirm the trial court’s order”
summarily denying his rule 3.850 motion for postconviction relief.) (citation
omitted); see also Carratelli v. State, 961 So. 2d 312, 324 (Fla. 2007) (“[W]here a
postconviction motion alleges that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to raise or
preserve a cause challenge, the defendant must demonstrate that a juror was actually
biased . . . Under the actual bias standard, the defendant must demonstrate that the
juror in question was not impartial-i.e., that the juror was biased against the
defendant, and the evidence of bias must be plain on the face of the record.”)
(citation omitted); Lusk v. State, 446 So. 2d 1038, 1041 (Fla. 1984) (“The test for
determining juror competency is whether the juror can lay aside any bias or prejudice
and render his verdict solely upon the evidence presented and the instructions on the
law given to him by the court.”) (citation omitted).
2