John J. Wilson Jr. v. the State of Florida
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
Date FiledApril 8, 2020
Docket3D20-0547
StatusPublished
📰 News Coverage: Read the LAWS.com news report on this case
Full Opinion
Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed April 8, 2020.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D20-547
Lower Tribunal No. 15-1083
________________
John J. Wilson, Jr.,
Petitioner,
vs.
The State of Florida,
Respondent.
A Case of Original Jurisdiction – Ineffective Assistance of Appellate Counsel.
John J. Wilson, Jr., in proper person.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for respondent.
Before EMAS, C.J., and GORDO and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration, we deny John J. Wilson, Jr.’s petition for writ of habeas
corpus alleging ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. See Rutherford v. Moore,
774 So. 2d 637, 643 (Fla. 2000) (observing that “‘[t]he criteria for proving
ineffective assistance of appellate counsel parallel the Strickland standard for
ineffective trial counsel.’ Wilson v. Wainwright, 474 So. 2d 1162, 1163 (Fla.1985).
Thus, this Court's ability to grant habeas relief on the basis of appellate counsel's
ineffectiveness is limited to those situations where the petitioner establishes first,
that appellate counsel's performance was deficient because ‘the alleged omissions
are of such magnitude as to constitute a serious error or substantial deficiency falling
measurably outside the range of professionally acceptable performance’ and second,
that the petitioner was prejudiced because appellate counsel's deficiency
‘compromised the appellate process to such a degree as to undermine confidence in
the correctness of the result.’ Thompson [v. State], 759 So. 2d [650,] 660 [(Fla.
2000)] (quoting Groover v. Singletary, 656 So. 2d 424, 425 (Fla.1995)). If a legal
issue ‘would in all probability have been found to be without merit’ had counsel
raised the issue on direct appeal, the failure of appellate counsel to raise the meritless
issue will not render appellate counsel's performance ineffective. Williamson v.
Dugger, 651 So. 2d 84, 86 (Fla. 1994)”) (additional internal citations omitted)). See
also Jones v. State, 658 So. 2d 122, 125 n. 2 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995) (noting that an
indigent defendant's act of filing a Bar complaint against court-appointed counsel
does not automatically create a conflict situation requiring the appointment of new
counsel).
2